View Full Document

Self Study Report Prepared for the Council for Education in Public Health November 2015 Executive Summary

Our mission as a leading public health school - ranked #14 in the nation by U.S. News and World Report’s list of Best Public Health Graduate schools – is to provide the best public health educational experience possible while incorporating our core values of scholarship and leadership, scientific rigor and policy analysis, and training to foster the next generation of public health leaders worldwide.

Over the past seven years we have made tremendous progress by restructuring our MPH and BS programs and curriculum, launching new degrees, hiring new faculty and staff, and offering scholarships to attract top students. In AY2010 we became financially and academically independent from the former Medical Center at GW and now directly report to the GW Provost.

In AY2014 we secured the largest gift in George Washington University history, $80 million dollars from the Milken Institute, the Sumner M. Redstone Charitable Foundation, and the Milken Family Foundation. This gift is helping expand our research, support new faculty initiatives, and sustain important scholarship programs.

We have been busy establishing research centers, awarding scholarships, and convening global leaders, scientists, and policy experts to discuss critical public health issues of the day. We have held symposiums on the Ebola virus, climate change, obesity and nutrition, and HIV/AIDS, to name a few. As the only public health school in the nation’s capital, we have the unique ability to attract and bring together experts from academia, government, foundations, NGOs, and the private sector to put their minds to work on developing solutions that will make the lives of many, especially the world’s underserved populations, healthier and disease-free.

Our building, which we moved into in 2014, has earned LEED Platinum status and is recognized by leading architecture organizations for its unique, sustainable design that demonstrates how an academic building can truly embody public health values. A central atrium staircase is immediately visible, encouraging walking instead of taking the elevator. All offices have standing desks, and our vending machines feature healthy snacks instead of the usual soda and candy. During this next year we are building out a new Public Health Laboratory in GW’s Science and Engineering Hall building that opened in AY2015. This state-of-the-art laboratory will house existing wet lab research conducted by our researchers and enables us to expand those efforts.

We have launched two online degree programs in the last four years, the MPH@GW and the MHA@GW, and are preparing to launch another, HealthInformatics@GW. Our online programs are leading the way, revolutionizing the world of online education and we will continue to position the school for further achievement.

Our school continues to adjust to the demands of today’s professional students. Over the last year, we achieved our goal of creating one-year MPH tracks to meet the changing needs of our students and current public health challenges. Additionally, we created a new MPH track in public health nutrition to educate students who want to prevent chronic diseases and premature deaths through the reduction of the twin threats of over- and under-nutrition.

Since our last review we have expanded our doctoral education programs to include a PhD in epidemiology and a new PhD in social and behavioral sciences in public health, in addition to our DrPH offerings.

In some respects, the numbers speak for themselves. In AY2007 we had a total of $17 million in research expenditures, in addition to the research that was underway in our Biostatistics Center. In AY2015 this was $43 million. Likewise in AY2007 we had a total of 1,040 students, compared to 1,783 today.

Despite all of our successes and achievements since our last review, we still have a long way to go. We will soon engage in a new strategic planning process to not only build on our achievements but to create new goals and objectives. The dramatic metamorphosis of our school demands that we reevaluate, recreate, and further drive our ability to deliver the best public health education to the most students possible in today’s ever changing academic landscape.

Table of Contents

GLOSSARY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………i CRITERIA 1: THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH ...... 1 1.1 MISSION ...... 1 1.1.a. School mission statement ...... 1 1.1.b. School values...... 1 1.1.c. Goal statements...... 2 1.1.e. Description of development of mission, vision, values, goals...... 3 1.1.f. How school makes M,V,V,G available to constituents...... 11 1.1.g. Assessment of criterion...... 11 1.2. EVALUATION...... 12 1.2.a. Description of the evaluation processes ...... 12 1.2.b. Description of how the results of the evaluation processes are used ...... 13 1.2.c. Data regarding measurable objectives...... 17 1.2.d. Description of how the self-study document was developed ...... 40 1.2.e. Assessment of criterion ...... 41 1.3. INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT...... 41 1.3.a. Description of the institution ...... 42 1.3.b. University organizational charts...... 43 1.3.c. Description of the school’s level of autonomy and authority...... 46 1.3.d. How SPH differs from other university schools...... 47 1.3.e. Collaborative schools ...... 48 1.3.f. Collaborative school agreement ...... 48 1.3.g. Assessment of criterion...... 48 1.4 ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION...... 49 1.4.a. Organizational chart of the school ...... 49 1.4.b. Description of the roles and responsibilities of major units in school...... 51 1.4.c. Description of interdisciplinary coordination, cooperation, and collaboration...... 54 1.4.d Assessment of criterion...... 55 1.5 GOVERNANCE...... 56

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

1.5.a. Standing and ad hoc committeesof the school ...... 56 1.5.b. Description of the school’s governance and committee structures...... 62 1.5.c. School bylaws and other policy documents ...... 65 1.5.d. School faculty on university committees...... 65 1.5.e. Description of student roles in governance, student organizations...... 67 1.5.f. Assessment of criterion...... 68 1.6 FISCAL RESOURCES ...... 68 1.6.a. Description of the budgetary and allocation processes ...... 69 1.6.b. School budget statement ...... 73 1.6.c. Budget for collaborative schools ...... 76 1.6.d. Measurable objectives for fiscal resources ...... 76 1.6.e. Assessment of criterion...... 78 1.7 FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES ...... 79 1.7.a Primary faculty knowledge areas ...... 79 1.7.b. A table of faculty, students and SFRs ...... 79 1.7.c. Statement defining FTE of non-faculty, non-student personnel...... 81 1.7.d. Description of space available to the school ...... 81 1.7.e. Precise description of laboratory space ...... 83 1.7.f. Computer facilities and resources...... 84 1.7.g. Description of library/information resources...... 85 1.7.h. Description of other resources ...... 87 1.7.i. Measurable objectives for resources ...... 87 1.7.j. Assessment of criterion...... 88 1.8 DIVERSITY...... 90 1.8.a. Policies demonstrating systematic incorporation of diversity within the school ...... 90 1.8.b. Evidence that policies are being implemented...... 95 1.8.c. Description of how policies were developed...... 96 1.8.d. Description of how policies are monitored ...... 97 1.8.e. Measurable objectives ...... 98 1.8.f. Assessment of criterion...... 99 CRITERIA 2: INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS ...... 100 2.1 DEGREE OFFERINGS...... 100

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

2.1.a. Instructional matrix ...... 100 2.1.b. School Bulletin ...... 102 2.1.c. Assessment of criterion...... 102 2.2 PROGRAM LENGTH...... 104 2.2.a. Definition of a credit...... 104 2.2.b. Minimum degree requirements ...... 105 2.2.c. Information about degrees less than 42 credits ...... 105 2.2.d. Assessment of criterion...... 105 2.3. PUBLIC HEALTH CORE KNOWLEDGE ...... 106 2.3.a. Assurance of public health core knowledge...... 106 2.3.b. Assessment of criterion...... 110 2.4 PRACTICAL SKILLS ...... 111 2.4.a. School policies and procedures regarding practice experiences...... 111 2.4.b. Identification of agencies and preceptors ...... 118 2.4.c. Data on students receiving waiver for practicum ...... 118 2.4.d. Data on preventive medicine practicums...... 119 2.4.e. Assessment of criterion...... 119 2.5 CULMINATING EXPERIENCE ...... 121 2.5.a. Culminating experiences for each degree program ...... 121 2.5.b. Assessment of criterion...... 124 2.6 REQUIRED COMPETENCIES ...... 126 2.6.a. Core competencies across degrees ...... 126 2.6.b. Program specific competencies ...... 132 2.6.c. Curricular maps ...... 132 2.6.d. Analysis of learning matrices ...... 132 2.6.e. Description of how competencies are developed ...... 133 2.6.f. Description of how the competencies are periodically assessed...... 134 2.6.g. Assessment of criterion...... 134 2.7 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES...... 136 2.7.a Description of how competencies are evaluated ...... 136 2.7.b. Measurable outcomes...... 137 2.7.c. Methods used to collect job placement data of graduates...... 141

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

2.7.d. Graduates’ performance on certification examinations...... 142 2.7.e. Data on how graduates perform in the workplace...... 142 2.7.f. Assessment of criterion...... 144 2.8 OTHER GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREES ...... 145 2.8.a. Description of professional degrees ...... 145 2.8.b. Public health orientation in professional degree programs ...... 146 2.8.c. Assessment of criterion...... 147 2.9 BACHELOR’S DEGREES IN PUBLIC HEALTH ...... 148 2.9.a. Description of bachelor’s level majors ...... 148 2.9.b. School level support for bachelor’s programs ...... 149 2.9.c. Curricular matrix ...... 149 2.9.d. Description of capstone experience...... 152 2.9.e. Assessment of criterion...... 152 2.10 OTHER BACHELOR’S DEGREES ...... 154 2.10.a. Description of other bachelor’s degree programs...... 154 2.10.b. Description of public health orientation...... 154 2.10.c. Assessment of criterion...... 154 2.11 ACADEMIC DEGREES ...... 157 2.11.a Identification of academic programs ...... 157 2.11.b. Public health orientation in academic degree programs...... 157 2.11.c. Description of culminating experience in each program ...... 165 2.11.d. Assessment of criterion...... 167 2.12 DOCTORAL DEGREES ...... 169 2.12.a. Identification of all doctoral programs...... 169 2.12.b. Description of support for doctoral students ...... 170 2.12.c. Data on doctoral student academic progression...... 171 2.12.d. Description of doctoral level coursework ...... 172 2.12.e. Assessment of criterion...... 175 2.13 JOINT DEGREES...... 177 2.13.a. Identification of joint degree programs...... 177 2.13.b. Description of how joint degrees differ from standard curriculum ...... 177 2.13.c. Assessment of criterion...... 178

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

2.14 DISTANCE EDUCATION OR EXECUTIVE DEGREE PROGRAMS ...... 179 2.14.a Description of degree programs offered in format other than on-site...... 179 2.14.b. Description of distance education or executive degree programs ...... 179 2.14.c. Description of student verification process ...... 183 2.14.d. Assessment of criterion...... 184 CRITERIA 3: CREATION, APPLICATION, AND ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE ...... 185 3.1 RESEARCH...... 185 3.1.a. Description of the school’s research activities ...... 185 3.1.b. Description of collaborative research activity...... 192 3.1.c. Current research of primary faculty ...... 194 3.1.d. Measures to evaluate research success ...... 195 3.1.e. Student involvement in research...... 198 3.1.f. Assessment of criterion...... 199 3.2. SERVICE ...... 201 3.2.a. Description of school’s service activities ...... 201 3.2.b. Description of emphasis given to faculty service in promotion/tenure ...... 202 3.2.c. List of school’s current service activities ...... 204 3.2.d. Measures to evaluate service efforts ...... 205 3.2.e. Description of student involvement in service ...... 206 3.2.f. Assessment of criterion...... 209 3.3. WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT...... 211 3.3.a. School assessment of continuing education needs ...... 211 3.3.b. Continuing education programs...... 212 3.3.c. Certificate and non-degree offerings ...... 213 3.3.d. Practices, policies, procedures and evaluation of workforce development ...... 214 3.3.e. Collaborating outside institutions and organizations for continuing education...... 215 3.3.f. Assessment of criterion...... 217 CRITERIA 4: FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS ...... 219 4.1 FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS...... 219 4.1.a. Primary faculty ...... 219 4.1.b. Other faculty ...... 241 4.1.c. Description of how faculty integrate practice ...... 244

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

4.1.d. Measurable Objectives ...... 246 4.1.e. Assessment of criterion...... 248 4.2 FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ...... 249 4.2.a. Documentation of faculty rules and regulations ...... 249 4.2.b. Description of faculty development...... 249 4.2.c. Description of faculty evaluation...... 250 4.2.d. Description of processes for course evaluation and instructional effectiveness...... 251 4.2.e. Assessment of criterion...... 252 4.3 STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSION ...... 253 4.3.a. Description of school’s recruitment policies and procedures...... 253 4.3.b. Statement of admissions policies and procedures ...... 254 4.3.c. Examples of recruitment materials...... 256 4.3.d. Quantitative information on student applications...... 257 4.3.e. Quantitative information on student enrollment ...... 262 4.3.f. Measurable objectives...... 265 4.3.g. Assessment criterion...... 266 4.4 ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING...... 267 4.4.a. Description of the school’s advising services ...... 267 4.4.b. Description of the school’s career counseling services...... 267 4.4.c. Information about student satisfaction with advising and career counseling services...... 269 4.4.d. Description of how students communicate concerns...... 271 4.4.e. Assessment of criterion...... 271 ELECTRONIC RESOURCE FILE OUTLINE……………………………….………………………………………………………………..273

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

Glossary

2U Vendor for online MPH and MHA programs AA African American AAAS American Association for Advancement of Science ABRCMS Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students ACB Active Chilled Beams ACEHSA Accrediting Commission on Education for Health Services Administration ACHE American College of Healthcare Executives ACSM American Council of Sports Medicine AED Automated Electronic Defibrillator APHA American Public Health Association APHL Association of Public Health Laboratories APT Appointment, Promotion and Tenure ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ASPPH Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health ASTHO Association of State and Territorial Health Officials ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Avance Center Center for the Advancement of Immigrant/Refugee Health AVP Assistant Vice President AY Academic Year BECS Biostatistics and Epidemiology Consulting Service Bio Biostatistics BPHSN Black Public Health Student Network BS Bachelor of Science CAHME Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education CCAS Columbian College of Arts and Sciences CD Certificate of Deposit CDC US Centers for Disease Control CE Culminating experience CEPH Council on Education for Public Health CHIP Children's Health Insurance Program CMS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services CPR Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation CPWR Center for Construction Research and Training CTSA Clinical and Translational Science Awards CV Curriculum Vitae DC District of Columbia DC-CFAR District of Columbia Center for AIDS Research DC DOH District of Columbia Department of Health DrPH Doctor of Public Health

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

DVD and CD Digital Video and Computer Disk EDF Environmental Defense Fund EEO/AA Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action EIR Executive in Residence EIS Educational Information System EGPAF Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation EOH Environmental and Occupational Health EPA Environmental Protection Agency Epi Epidemiology Epi/Bio Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics ERF Electronic Resource File ESIA Elliot School of International Affairs EST Established EXNS Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences EXSC Exercise Science (or Department of Exercise Science) FA Financial Aid FBCP Foggy Bottom Conservation Plan FCOI Financial Conflict of Interest FDA Food and Drug Administration FRIENDS Membership organization for Foggy Bottom neighborhood FEET2/FT 2 Square foot FTE Full-time equivalent FY Fiscal Year GCAS Grants and Contract Accounting Services GH Department of Global Health GMA Grants Management Administrators GMAT Graduate Management Admission Test GRA Graduate Research Assistant GRAD2GRAD GW program for graduating seniors to continue education with a tuition discount GRE Graduate Record Examination GSGS Graduate Student Graduation Survey GSEHD Graduate School of Education and Human Development GWSPH George Washington University School of Public Health GW/GWU George Washington University GWID George Washington University Identification GWSB GW School of Business HANES Health and Nutrition Examination Survey HC Headcount HCC Healthcare Corporate Compliance HEPA High-efficiency particulate arrestance HHS Health & Human Services HIPPA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act HIT Health Information Technology

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

HLWL Health and Wellness HP Department of Health Policy HPM Department of Health Policy and Management HPSA Health Policy Student Association HRSA Health Resources and Services Administration HSML Department of Health Services and Management Leadership HUD Housing and Urban Development HVAC Heating, ventilation, air conditioning IDC Indirect Cost IDIQ Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity iDXA Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry IELTS International English Language Testing System IMF International Monetary Fund IOM Institute of Medicine IRB Institutional Review Board ISCOPES Interdisciplinary Student Community-Oriented Prevention Enhancement Service IT Informational Technology JD Juris Doctor LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LGBTQ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer LMS Learning Management System LOA Leave of Absence LS Limited Service LSAT Law School Admissions Test LSPA Lifestyle Sport and Physical Activity LTA Long Term Agreement MCAT Medical College Admission Test MD Medical Doctor MeTRIC DC Metro Tobacco Research & Instruction Consortium MHA Master of Health Administration MOOC Massive Open Online Course MPH Master of Public Health MS Master of Science MSCHE Middle States Commission on Higher Education MWCOG Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments N/A Not applicable NAB National Association of Long Term Care Administrators Board NACCHO The National Association of County and City Health Officials NACES National Association of Credential Evaluation Services NBPHE National Board of Public Health Examiners NCD National Council on Disability NCEH National Center for Environmental Health NGO Non-Government Organizations

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

NIAID National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases NIH National Institute of Health NIMHD National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities OCLC network Online Computer Library Center… OGAC Office of the US Global AIDS Coordinator OGC Office of the General Counsel ORE Office of Research Excellence ORU Organized Research Unit OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration OVPR Office of the Vice President of Research PA - C Physician Assistant -Certified PACT Prevention, Assessment, Care & Treatment Laboratory PAHO Pan American Health Organization PCH Department of Prevention and Community Health PDF Portable Document Format PhD Doctor of Philosophy PHMEID Public Health Microbiology and Environmental Infectious Diseases PHSA Public Health Students Association PI Principal Investigator PIVOT Search engine for grant funding opportunities PSC Program Support Center PSI Population Services International RCHN RCHN Community Health Foundation RFA Request for Application R-fund Savings account RTI International Research Triangle Institute SAMP Student Alumni Mentoring Program SAS State-of-Art-Statistical Software ScD Doctor of Science SCOPUS Abstract and citation database SEAS School of Engineering and Applied Science SEH Science and Engineering Hall SEIU Service Employees International Union SES Socioeconomic Status SESS Society of Exercise Science Students SFR Student Faculty Ratio SLA Service Level Agreements SMDEP Summer Medical and Dental Education Program SMHS School of Medicine and Health Sciences SON School of Nursing SOPHAS Schools of Public Health Application System SPA Sponsored Project Administrators SPH School of Public Health

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

Sq ft Square feet SS Synchronous Sessions STS Student Technology Services SWOT analysis Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, Threats TBD To be determined TLC Teaching and Learning Center TNI Transforming Neighborhoods Initiative TOEFL Test of English as a Foreign Language UG Undergraduate UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UPS United Postal Service URP Under-represented populations USAID United States Agency for International Development VALOR GW Veterans Accelerate Learning Opportunities and Rewards VAV Variable Air Volume VO2 Volume of Oxygen VPN Virtual Private Network VSTC Virginia Science & Technology Campus WES World Education Service WHO World Health Organization WRLC Washington Area Research Library

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015

CRITERIA 1: The School of Public Health

1.1 MISSION. THE SCHOOL SHALL HAVE A CLEARLY FORMULATED AND PUBLICLY STATED MISSION WITH SUPPORTING GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND VALUES.

1.1.a. A clear and concise mission statement for the school as a whole.

The Milken Institute School of Public Health (SPH) is committed to excellence in scholarship to advance the health of the populations of our local, national, and global communities. Through a transparent and collaborative process, we created our mission, vision, and values as outlined in 1.1.e, and in alignment with the University Strategic Vision: https://provost.gwu.edu/sites/provost.gwu.edu/files/downloads/Strategic%20Plan_May13.pdf.

Our Mission Our mission is to provide the best public health educational experience incorporating our core values of scholarship and leadership, scientific rigor and policy analysis, and training to foster the next generation of thought leaders, practitioners, policy makers and scientists who will transform public health worldwide especially for underserved and poor populations.

Our Vision As complex global health challenges continue to threaten our health and future, the Milken Institute School of Public Health will be preeminent in training tomorrow’s leaders for improving the public’s health. We aspire to become one of the top five private schools of public health in the world.

1.1.b. A statement of values that guides the school.

The Milken Institute SPH shares with the rest of the university (http://hr.gwu.edu/values) a set of core values that can be applied very specifically to the mission of our School. These are:

Learning: We support opportunities for continuous development that maximize the potential of the individual and strengthen the university. Communication: We strive to share information and ideas in an open, consistent, and effective manner. Community: We strive to build a strong community in the service of our shared purpose and mission. Diversity: We embrace the unique contributions of all members of our community. Excellence: We commit ourselves to achieving the highest standards in all our endeavors. Respect: We treat others with courtesy and dignity. Service: We embrace our responsibility to exceed the expectations of others who depend on our actions. Sustainability: We value and engage in sustainable practices that enhance current and future resources for our campus, our community, and our world. Teamwork: We encourage collaboration to meet common goals and produce a sense of shared responsibility.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 1

1.1.c. One or more goal statements for each major function through which the school intends to attain its mission, including at a minimum, instruction, research and service.

The SPH has established the following goals:

1. Raise the prominence and visibility of the Milken Institute SPH as one of the top ten schools of public health in the country; 2. Deepen the culture of excellence in education; 3. Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national prominence; 4. Integrate the School’s global health initiatives in alignment with GW’s institutional global impact goals; 5. Leverage health policy expertise to impact policies and improve public health; 6. Be at the forefront of GW institutional initiatives on citizenship and leadership; and 7. Increase financial strength.

1.1.d. A set of measurable objectives with quantifiable indicators related to each goal statement.

GOAL ONE: Raise the prominence and visibility of the SPH to one of the top ten schools of public health in the country. • Objective 1: Recruit and retain a diverse and expert faculty. • Objective 2: Recruit and enroll top-tier students. • Objective 3: Establish and implement a robust communications plan.

GOAL TWO: Deepen the culture of excellence in education. • Objective 1: Provide state-of-the-art facilities for teaching and learning. • Objective 2: Expand range of applied learning opportunities to broader community. • Objective 3: Deepen faculty development for teaching. • Objective 4: Deploy comprehensive and inclusive systems for ongoing evaluation and feedback.

GOAL THREE: Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. • Objective 1: Foster a culture of research excellence through capacity building, collaboration, and collegiality across departments, faculty, and staff. • Objective 2: Provide state-of-the-art physical research facilities. • Objective 3: Increase externally funded research conducted at the SPH. • Objective 4: Enhance the scholarly output of SPH faculty, research staff, and students. • Objective 5: Elevate the visibility of GW SPH research to the school, university, national, and international audiences. • Objective 6: Cultivate doctoral and Post-doctoral research training platforms.

GOAL FOUR: Integrate the School’s global health initiatives in alignment with GW’s institutional global impact goals. • Objective 1: Expand expertise and leadership in global health. • Objective 2: Establish collaborative, organized centers for Global Research and Education.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 2

• Objective 3: Develop model curricula for global health research and training. • Objective 4: Develop a robust infrastructure for global research.

GOAL FIVE: Leverage health policy expertise to impact policies and improve public health. • Objective 1. Build strength in health economics and global health policy. • Objective 2. Strengthen linkages between policy and management. • Objective 3. Generate resources to respond to critical policy issues. • Objective 4: Support faculty in communicating results of research to policy makers. • Objective 5: Redesign Health Policy curriculum to be responsive to changing workforce demands. • Objective 6: Increase funding for PhD students in Public Policy and Admin (HP track). • Objective 7. Convene key stakeholders and decision makers around high priority issues.

GOAL SIX: Be at the forefront of GW institutional initiatives on citizenship and leadership. • Objective 1: Recognize and reward university, community and professional service. • Objective 2: Foster a mindset of interdisciplinary and inter-professional service leadership among faculty, staff and students. • Objective 3: Expand the School’s faculty and staff-led practice-based partnerships, and the options available for the required student practicum experience. • Objective 4: Engage with local institutions to develop and implement policies and programs to improve health locally.

GOAL SEVEN: Increase financial strength. • Objective 1: Establish a forward looking budget process that engages all SPH leadership. • Objective 2: Raise $25M for construction of new buildings. • Objective 3: Meet GW Campaign goals. • Objective 4: Create more opportunities for revenue growth.

1.1.e. Description of the manner through which the mission, values, goals and objectives were developed, including a description of how various specific stakeholder groups were involved in their development.

Until 2010-2011 the School was housed within an administrative unit of the University known as the Medical Center, and the Dean reported to the Vice Provost/Vice President for Health Affairs (VPHA). The Medical Center was comprised of the School of Medicine and Health Sciences (SMHS), the School of Public Health and Health Services (SPHSH) and the School of Nursing (SON). All research funding in the Medical Center was directed through a separate research entity that was headed by the Medical Center’s Assistant Vice President for Research, who also reported to the VPHA. Likewise, there were AVPs for Development and Alumni Relations, Communications, and Finance. In May 2010 the GW Board of Trustees directed the University administration to begin a review of the organizational structure of

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 3

the GW Medical Center and define a long-term strategy for the three schools. Several factors had driven this request: • Rapid change and growth within the health care industry and the demands placed on higher education to support these transformations. • Prior transitions in which the GW Hospital and the GW Medical Faculty were spun off from the university. • Questions about whether the shared resource model within the Medical Center was adequately supporting the growing needs of each of the three independent schools.

An external health services consulting firm, BDC Advisors, LLC, assisted in the review and made recommendations on alternative structures that would support a sustainable model for the future. After “Phase I” of the process (Organizational Assessment), BDC made a number of recommendations. Relevant to the SPH, they recommended that GW change the reporting relationship of the deans (including public health) to the Provost, thus eliminating the Vice Provost/VP Health Affairs as a separate position. They felt that this new arrangement would eliminate unnecessary complexity and expense, strengthen the role of the three deans, and promote the development of both the SPH and SON as vital independent professional educational programs. The resulting re-organization was intended to further the university’s goal to create a vision and a model that would allow GW’s health care initiatives to grow and bring parity between its structure and those of peer institutions.

GW accepted this recommendation; between November 2010-May 2011 we carried out “Phase II” (Structure, Vision and Strategy). Across all three schools, faculty were frequently engaged by Deans and by President Knapp to obtain input in restructuring, as well as building a vision and strategy. Functions were reviewed across the organization. A very intensive joint planning process began in June 2011 that resulted in a blueprint for implementation of the reorganization.

At that point, a separate budget was created for the SPH that included its research as well as academic revenues. As of July 1, 2011 the SPH was a separate entity from the Medical Center, with the Dean reporting to the Provost. As of that point, the SPH had full citizenship in terms of representation in university-wide governance process. However, a three-year “shared services” agreement was created such that the SMHS continued to provide services to the SPH until the SPH was able to transition to its own independent staffing for Information Technology, Development and Alumni Relations, Communications, and Classroom Support. With the exception of classroom support, these transitions occurred between 2011 and 2012, at which point these service agreements were terminated. The SPH obtained its own classrooms in Fall 2014 after moving into the new SPH building. Additional agreements continue to cover the SPH utilization of space in the SMHS for laboratories in Ross Hall, as well as the services of the SMHS Himmelfarb Medical Library.

Upon the separation of the Medical Center in 2011, SPH began to establish the foundation for developing a vision for the school that focused on: • Building on our excellence in teaching and public health practice; • Growing new efforts in interdisciplinary research and development; • Updating, and expanding, academic program offerings; and

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 4

• Aggressive recruitment efforts to attract interdisciplinary and renowned faculty.

In order to support these efforts, the SPH also began to develop of an administration that would support the academic, research, and operational needs of the school as well as its efforts to raise the visibility and the prominence of the School over the next 10 years.

As a result of the dissolution of the Medical Center, the School dedicated much of the initial stages for establishing its new mission, values, goals, and objectives by seeking internal and external stakeholder engagement.

Internal Engagement: GW Administration

Internally, we worked closely with the Office of the Provost, the GW Budget Office the Office for the Vice President for Research (OVPR), and the Business Management and Analysis Group. The Deans of the three schools established regular standing meetings to discuss industry and organizational challenges as well as shared interests such as the Himmelfarb Library and the development of laboratory infrastructure. A number of other Schools at GW also played an important role in this transition, most notably, the School of Law, the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences and the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences.

Relative to faculty and staff, we worked closely with the Division of Human Resources to build the new structure of the School. This included using market survey data to analyze and identify the structure needed to support the growth of the school. Between 2011-2014 the following administrative and academic offices were developed that did not previously exist at the School: • Office of Communications and External Relations • Office of Development and Alumni Relations • Office of Human Resources • Office of Faculty Affairs • Office of Information Technology • Office of Finance and Administration • Office of Research Excellence • Office of Practice

In most cases, these functions were completely new to the SPH and we needed to recruit a completely new cadre of leaders. In 2011 we recruited a new, experienced Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; and in 2012 we recruited Associate Deans for Research and for Public Health Practice, doubling faculty effort dedicated to decanal activities.

Internal Engagement: GW SPH Faculty, Staff and Students

Upon arrival at GW in August 2010, the Dean established a schedule of regular meetings with the SPH Department Chairs. The purpose of these meetings was to develop a joint governance model based on developing the strength within departmental operations and departmental committees, as well as a

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 5

schedule for regular faculty meetings to open up channels of communications across departments. In 2009 the SPH had been found to be out of compliance with certain provisions of the University Faculty Code, necessitating a number of changes in process as well as the recruitment of additional tenure track faculty members.

In November 2010 the Dean informed the SPH Faculty of impending transitions that had been approved by the Board of Trustees. Targeted areas for review and assessment by the faculty included:

• opportunities to pilot a school-based research infrastructure for pre- and post- award management; • defining the roles and responsibilities of Development, Alumni Relations and Communications functions; • space management; • designing a permanent academic home for the School; and • structuring governance issues.

The Trustees charged the School with developing new governance processes in harmony with the University Faculty Code, to be completed by the end of December 2010, and to be reported to the Trustees no later than the end of January 2011. Final governance procedures, created with input from the School’s community – department chairs, faculty, students, and staff –were voted on by the faculty and approved by Provost Lerman.

These steps were accomplished primarily via appointment of faculty-driven committees representing all of our departments, (e.g., an ad hoc bylaws committee to address both the reorganization and the requirements of the faculty code, as well as a committee that completed the overhaul of our APT criteria.) The new bylaws established the School Executive Committee, procedures for establishment of search committees, and a schedule for the SPH Faculty Assembly meetings. In 2011 new bylaws and new APT criteria were adopted by the SPH Faculty Assembly. An important feature of these new bylaws was to establish broad representation in the SPH governance processes, with engagement not only of regular faculty but also research faculty, at every possible turn and within the limits imposed by the University Faculty Code.

We also took steps to support our Public Health Student Association (PHSA) and to find ways for them to participate in the governance of the school. Nearly every committee now has student representation, whether in voting or nonvoting capacities. The PHSA has steadily grown in strength and autonomy, and has become much more engaged in our ongoing efforts to build the vision and mission of the SPH.

External Engagement: Key stakeholders

In 2010 the SPH had an active Health Services Management and Leadership (HSML) Alumni Association, but an existing Dean’s Council that had not met for two years and a defunct SPH Alumni Association. Within the Medical Center, only 0.5 FTE supported all SPH fundraising and alumni relations. We had much room to improve.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 6

The Dean’s Council was reactivated and reinvigorated (see below) and networking became a priority. Via the HSML Alumni Association and ongoing alumni events that were hosted by the Medical Center, the SPH was able to reconnect with many alumni. Additionally, because of its location, the SPH has strong connections with numerous alumni, and others, who work in the many federal, state, local, global NGO, community and other health and healthcare entities in the DC area. Many of these individuals are actively engaged in the school as instructors, mentors, practicum supervisors, and employers of our graduates. We began holding events and extending invitations to school functions for these constituents. Our faculty are actively engaged with Academy Health, the APHA, the National Academy of Medicine and other organizations, through which we are able to reconnect with many alumni, who helped provide insights into the developments in public health and healthcare, relevant to our educational programs.

To formally solicit external stakeholder engagement, the SPH Dean’s Council had its inaugural meeting February 2011. Council members included prominent alumni, GW supporters and supporters from the broader Washington DC community. Members of the council were expected to contribute to the growth and development of the School and provide valuable guidance and input to the SPH regarding strategic programs, initiatives and philanthropy. They worked to strengthen the School’s reputation and relationships not only with alumni, but with individuals who are influential in government and business and organizations in the local, national, and international communities. Members of the Council were committed to help increase the visibility of the SPH; provide assistance in outreach and public relations efforts; engage and assist in ongoing philanthropic endeavors; and serve in an advisory capacity on a number of the SPH initiatives, including finalizing plans for our new building. The Dean’s Council met two-three times per year between 2011-2015 and has provided valuable input on the SPH vision, mission and values as well as a broad array of other objectives.

Strategic Planning

The development of the mission and values were further refined within the School’s strategic planning processes. Below is a brief overview of the evolution of the strategic planning process since AY 2011 when the School became independent from the Medical Center. The plan has guided our processes for developing new governance structures and for occupying the new building, as well as to envision the ways and areas in which the School would grow.

FIRST STRATEGIC PLANNING PHASE (2011- 2014) Prior to the Medical Center reorganization, the SPH had been operating using a Strategic Plan developed in May 2008. Our new status within the University, along with changes in our external environment, required renewed strategic planning. A Strategic Planning process has continuously engaged our (growing) faculty even as the SPH was undergoing major developmental transitions.

May 31, 2011: Strategic Planning Retreat, leadership retreat that included all SPH professors and leaders of academic programs. This one-day meeting was held offsite and had the following objectives:

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 7

• Serve as the starting point for a strategic planning process; • Create a common understanding of current obstacles and future opportunities to shape our planning in the months ahead; and • Provide a forum for collaboration, creativity, and strategic idea generation.

The retreat identified a number of important themes that were carried through in subsequent planning processes. First, while there was strong support for the vision and mission that had been articulated in 2008, there was concern about the capacity of the school to address that mission. Three sets of breakout groups were formed that addressed: (1) Identification of obstacles; (2) improving educational programs; and (3) building research. Subsequent feedback from these groups assured that many perspectives were heard across the faculty. The most important overarching themes were the need to: increase communications and transparency; improve our research infrastructure; address faculty development and mentoring; increase collaboration; improve systems; and better leverage our location as a differentiator.

November 29-30, 2011: Strategic Planning Retreat, Taking Responsibility to Imagine Our Future, inclusive of all SPH faculty. This two-day event continued the work of the May retreat, and utilized an Open Meeting format, supporting the development of shared ideas in a dynamic format. All faculty, including adjunct faculty, were invited. The outcome of this retreat was the prioritization of nine themes that were each developed further by working groups. The working groups, established in December 2011, were each chaired by one of the SPH department chairs or vice chairs; each included representation from every department, and was also inclusive of student and staff representation. They consisted of: distance education (R. Burke); executive education (D. Verme); doctoral education (L. DiPietro); research (A. Greenberg); laboratory science (M. Perry); global health (J. Sherry); school of public health community-building (J. Cawley); and community health (P. Lantz). Final working group reports were completed and distributed in April 2012 to all faculty post-retreat. An ad hoc Strategic Planning Steering Committee, that included broad representation from across the SPH, was appointed and met as described below. See ERF 1.1.e.: Strategic Planning Steering Committee.

April 11, 2012: Strategic Planning Committee Retreat. Each strategic planning working group presented a report to the Steering Committee, followed by a discussion about recommended action steps. Working group reports contained the following information: opportunity/problem statement; strengths and weaknesses; stakeholders; objectives; and recommendations. After reviewing these reports, the steering committee developed recommendations for updating the school's vision, mission, and values statements to reflect the input from multiple sources, both internally and externally. These were subsequently reviewed at a meeting of the School Faculty Assembly. The full agenda for this meeting and the working group reports can be found in ERF 1.1.e.: Strategic Planning Meeting April 2012. The final draft Strategic Plan that emerged from this process was completed by August 2012 and the Steering Committee was sunsetted.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 8

August 2012: The University Provost issued a strategic plan that defined overall objectives for GW and established several cross cutting themes. The SPH Executive Committee added the university-wide objectives and themes and somewhat reorganized the SPH Strategic Plan to more clearly align it with the new GW plan.

December 4, 2012: With the hire of a new Associate Dean for Research, as well as several new research- oriented faculty, we held a second strategic planning retreat focused on the development of strategies to organize and build research in the SPH. Conclusions and recommendations from this effort were folded into the SPH strategic plan under the leadership of the Associate Dean for Research and reviewed along with the rest of the plan as described below.

March 19, 2013: Over the next several months, initial drafts went through multiple succeeding drafts as they were reviewed and revised by faculty, chairs, administrators, and staff leadership. Strategic Plan Draft 8 was approved by the SPH Faculty Assembly (ERF 1.1.e.: Strategic Plan Draft).

May 2014: At the semi-annual SPH Faculty Assembly, the Dean presented a State of the School report that reviewed progress toward achievement of the SPH Strategic Plan. At that time, it was clear that many of the objectives established in November 2011 were well underway to completion.

SECOND STRATEGIC PLANNING PHASE (2014-2015) July 15-16, 2014, Strategic Planning Retreat: The purpose of this retreat was to review outcomes of the first strategic planning process and refine the goals leading toward the advancement of opportunities for collaboration and development, and to advance the mission of the SPH. All faculty were invited, as well as well as key staff and student leadership.

This retreat began with an open-ended survey of all faculty; to identify key themes and issues, as well as interest among the participants in leading discussions of those issues. A second online survey invited the faculty to prioritize the ideas that had been suggested. All at the retreat were assigned to four groups covering the 19 high-priority themes that had emerged from the surveys. At the close of the meeting, each group leader presented a report, including conclusions and recommendations.

This strategic planning process identified a number of conclusions and recommendations that were incorporated into the SPH Strategic Plan, including:

• Aging: Support the existing Center for Healthy Aging in its efforts to establish grant support. • Antibiotics: Establish a Center to study science and policy aspects of antibiotic resistant bacteria in the context of industrial agriculture usage of antibiotics. • Big Data: Emphasize these skills in recruitment of new faculty. • Chronic Disease: Recruit a chronic disease epidemiologist. • Climate and Health: Establish a school-wide climate and health working group. • DC Health: Identify a faculty leader who can pursue funding and create partnerships.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 9

• Health and healthcare disparities: Consider the establishment of a university-wide working group. • Global chronic disease: Support the reorganization of the GW Center for Global Health. • Healthcare system reform: Consider merging the departments of Health Policy and Health Services Management and Leadership. Establish a seminar focused on innovations. Identify potential targeted hires and corporate partners to build capacity. • Healthcare workforce: Support and strengthen the existing healthcare workforce policy center. • mHealth: Support and strengthen the existing mHealth collaborative and seek new corporate partnerships. • Mental health: Support establishment of a mental health and wellness working group. • Obesity: Work plan to be developed by the new Redstone Center. Recruit a faculty member for the new Sanofi professorship. • Prevention policy: seek funding for a new prevention policy center. • Reproductive health: Expand the work of the existing Jacobs Institute for Women’s Health to encompass women’s health globally. • Translational research: Consider establishing a PhD in this area. Make this area a target for new faculty recruitments.

The SPH Executive Committee incorporated a number of these recommendations into continued SPH strategic planning. For example, three school-wide Education Task Forces were created:

• Undergraduate Education • Methods Sequencing (Quantitative and Qualitative) • Expedited MPH degree options

These Task Forces met throughout the remainder of 2014-15 and provided recommendations to the Executive Advisory Committee.

Strategic Planning Reports were provided and discussed at the following meetings:

• Chairs’ Meeting, 7/17/14 • Executive Advisory Committee, 9/24/14 • Executive Advisory Committee, 10/23/14 • Executive Advisory Committee, 12/15/14 • Executive Advisory Committee, 1/9/15

The final stage in completion of this process will be to present a revised strategic plan, reflecting objectives that have been completed or are underway as well as new objectives emerging from the AY2014 retreat. In Spring 2016 we anticipate launching a new round of strategic planning.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 10

1.1.f. Description of how the mission, values, goals and objectives are made available to the school’s constituent groups, including the general public, and how they are routinely reviewed and revised to ensure relevance.

As articulated above, the new mission, vision, values and goals of the SPH were developed and elaborated by a comprehensive process and were approved by the Faculty Assembly in March 2013. They remain our guiding principles in development of departmental and curricular initiatives.

We present ourselves to the public through the School webpage: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/about. An Annual Report is also published by the Communications Department for distribution to key stakeholders such as donors in the Honor Roll of Donors, leaders of other schools of public health and university leadership. ERF 1.1.f.: Annual Reports

The Provost receives an annual state of the school document describing academic, research and fiscal accomplishments, highlighting important challenges, successes and progress experienced, and the achievement of goals.

Each department must complete a comprehensive academic program review every five to seven years. As part of this activity, mission, vision, values and goals are re-evaluated.

1.1.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Clearly stated mission, vision, values and goals, in alignment with the University’s strategic vision. • Ongoing and inclusive strategic planning since gaining independence from the Medical Center. • Periodic review of progress towards goals.

Challenges: • None identified.

Future plans: • Implementation of strategic planning outcomes, including, most recently, three Education Task Force recommendations. • Embark on the next phase of strategic planning in Spring 2016.*

*By then SPH should have the report from the CEPH Committee. Any recommendations in it will be a component of the next planning cycle.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 11

1.2. EVALUATION. THE SCHOOL SHALL HAVE AN EXPLICIT PROCESS FOR MONITORING AND EVALUATING ITS OVERALL EFFORTS AGAINST ITS MISSION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES; FOR ASSESSING THE SCHOOL’S EFFECTIVENESS IN SERVING ITS VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES AND FOR USING EVALUATION RESULTS IN ONGOING PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING TO ACHIEVE ITS MISSION. AS PART OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS, THE SCHOOL MUST CONDUCT AN ANALYTICAL SELF-STUDY THAT ANALYZES PERFORMANCE AGAINST THE ACCREDITATION CRITERIA DEFINED IN THIS DOCUMENT.

1.2.a. Description of the evaluation processes used to monitor progress against objectives defined in Criterion 1.1.d, including identification of the data systems and responsible parties associated with each objective and with the evaluation process as a whole.

Table 1.2.a.1 Evaluation and monitoring process

Goal Primary Responsibility Data systems

Raise the prominence and • Deans • US News & World Report visibility of the Milken Institute • Department Chairs • USA Today SPH to one of the top ten • Executive Director of • SOPHAS schools of public health in the Communication • Office of Institutional Research country. • AVP, Development • Recruitment Services: Salesforce, PeopleAdmin7 • Media Services: Newswise, Meltwater, EurekAlert!, Google Analytics Deepen the culture of • Deans • Student Information Reports excellence in education. • Chairs and Vice Chairs (Ellucian Banner) • Curriculum Committee • GW Business Intelligence data • DrPH Program Director warehouse accessed through • UG Program Director IBM Cognos • MPH Program Committee • SmartEval course evaluations • Practice Committee • GW Faculty Annual Reporting • Director of Admissions System (Lyterati) • Practicum Reports (Simplicity) • Provost’s Student Exit Surveys Propel the School’s • Associate Dean for Research • Staff/Faculty Data Banner interdisciplinary research • Department Chairs • SCOPUS portfolio to national and • Research Committee • OVPR Research Quarterly international prominence. • Director of Finance Reports • AVP, Development Integrate the School’s global • Dean • Faculty Reports health initiatives in alignment • Chair of Global Health • Academic Offerings Abroad with GW’s institutional global • OVPR • SOPHAS impact goals. • SalesForce

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 12

Table 1.2.a.1 Evaluation and monitoring process, (continued)

Goal Primary Responsibility Data systems

Leverage health policy expertise • Dean • Lyterati to impact policies and improve • Chair of HPM • SCOPUS public health. • Events tracking • Executive Director of Communication • AVP, Development Be at the forefront of GW • Deans • Faculty Reports institutional initiatives on • Department Chairs • Policy Research Grants • citizenship and leadership. Executive Committee • Faculty Recognition • Ethics Committee Increase financial strength. • Director of Finance • Financial Reports (Banner, • Dean and Sr. Associate Dean McBud) • AVP, Development • Banner • Executive Committee • SOPHAS • SalesForce

The Dean, in collaboration with the Senior Associate Dean, has monitored the progress made toward the School’s goals and objectives as well as the strategic plan. In July of every year, the Dean provides an annual performance review to the Provost covering a number of bases, including the GW Strategic Plan, the SPH Strategic Plan, and a number of specific goals related to the university campaign and values. Twice annually, the Dean reviews the progress toward implementation of the Strategic Plan at SPH Faculty Assembly meetings. Each fall the SPH presents a public annual report that highlights a number of aspects of its progress. Most recently, progress reports and updates were presented during the Faculty Assembly meetings (or in one case a special State of the School address) in March 2014, December 2014, March 2015, and September 2015; where leadership and faculty were welcomed to provide commentary on these results. The SPH Dean’s Council has been updated several times, most notably in April 2012 and September 2014. Previously the SPH was invited to brief the Board of Trustees Medical Center Committee on these same issues; we sought input from them at an early stage in the process, in May 2012. The most recent date for one of these reports was February 2014. Moving forward, the goals and objectives will continue to be monitored on a semiannual basis by the executive administrative and academic leadership of the school.

1.2.b. Description of how the results of the evaluation processes described in Criterion 1.2.a. are monitored, analyzed, communicated and regularly used by managers responsible for enhancing the quality of programs and activities.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 13

1. Departmental Level Each department has a curriculum committee that meets monthly to review program and course offerings, programmatic goals, student concerns and other issues. Program goals and curricular maps are reviewed annually. Departmental chairs review course evaluations as they become available and establish a plan to improve instruction and student experiences accordingly. The Chairs also monitor progress.

All departments have monthly faculty meetings to discuss strategic initiatives, student concerns, research opportunities and instructional offerings. Some departments also conduct annual strategic planning retreats. Every five to seven years, each department undertakes a comprehensive academic review (see below). Full-time faculty members are required to complete an Annual Report, on Lyterati, which is used by each Department Chair as a tool in faculty performance evaluations. Other resources available to the departments include the practicum evaluations completed by students and practicum preceptors. Chairs have access to a large amount of additional information: such as student course evaluations and exit surveys, budget, and grants data.

2. School level The School has several mechanisms to monitor progress on our goals, including multiple formal governing bodies with specific charges (see Criteria 1.5). The Admissions Committee plays a key role in monitoring progress on portions of Goals 1 and 2. The APT committee is critical to ensure that we have a diverse and productive faculty. Curriculum quality and pedagogy are reviewed regularly through course evaluations, monthly curriculum meetings, and graduation surveys. We collect data regarding classroom, space and library usage to inform scheduling and plan resource allocation. The MPH core courses are evaluated by a school-wide curriculum committee on a rolling basis, roughly once every two years.

The Dean also meets monthly with the six Departmental Chairs. The Associate Deans monitor research productivity, practice activities and student admissions and report to the Executive Advisory Committee, as well as to the faculty senate at each meeting. Each year the departmental chairs review faculty productivity and teaching excellence with the Dean, along with results from the graduating student any alumni surveys conducted both by the University and the School. The Senior Associate Dean and Associate Deans meet monthly to coordinate cross-cutting issues. The Dean conducts annual reviews of the performance of chairs and Associate Deans and Directors.

The School administration and relevant standing committees review student census data, admissions progress and graduation rates on an ongoing basis. The Dean reviews the progress of the School toward meeting its strategic objectives on an annual basis at a faculty assembly meeting.

3. University Level Each year the Dean provides an annual progress report to the Provost for review.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 14

Once every five to seven years each department at GW undertakes a major self-study review as outlined below, which is required by the Provost.

The GW Self-Study and Review process is designed to regularly assess and evaluate departmental teaching, research, and community activities. This process consists of an internal self-study. The SPH also requires an external review. The objectives of the process are:

• To assess and evaluate a department’s mission, goals, and objectives as well as its strengths and weaknesses with respect to the teaching, research, and community/public health practice activities of the department; • To assess and evaluate the extent to which the department’s activities further the missions of the department, School, and University; • To develop a five-year strategic plan, based on the self-study assessments and evaluations, that will advance the mission, goals and objectives of the Department (within the context of the School and University); • To provide departmental and other relevant faculty members with the opportunity to express their views about the leadership of the department (especially with respect to the Department’s ability to carry out its mission and to achieve its specific goals and objectives); and. • To provide external input on departmental programs from the perspective of peers who understand the external environment.

The process consists of an internal review by the Department, the result of which is a self-study document presented to the SPH Executive Advisory Committee. The next step is an external review conducted on-site by a three-member team, which typically lasts one-and-a-half days. This committee provides a written report to the Dean, which is reviewed with the departmental chair and presented to the Provost. The table below presents our progress to date:

Table 1.2.b.: Department Reviews Department Self-study period External review Provost Review Health Policy Fall 2013 Jan 13-15, 2014 Dec. 9, 2014

HSML Fall 2013 Jan 13-15, 2014 Dec. 9, 2014

Epi/Bio Spring 2013 Jan 22-24, 2014 Dec. 11, 2014 EOH Fall 2013 Feb 26-28, 2014 Dec. 19, 2014 EXNS Fall 2014 Nov 5-6, 2014 Oct. 28, 2015 GH Spring 2015 To be Scheduled To be Scheduled PCH Winter 2015 To be Scheduled To be Scheduled

Examples of major changes that have occurred because of these evaluation processes:

• Revamp the Office of Student Affairs and add two additional roles; Assistant Dean for Student Services, Assistant Dean for MPH programs • Launch 2 Online programs • Create one-year MPH options

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 15

• Changed MPH core • Inclusion of participation in University faculty development programs in annual review • Developed and implemented first post-doctoral fellowship program • Funded and launched the Global Center for Prevention and Wellness (recruited director) • Launch new MPH track in Global Environmental Health (recruited new faculty director) • Merged two departments: Health Policy and Health Services Leadership and Management • Hired first Associate Dean for Practice and created Office of Practice • Inclusion of practice in APT guidelines • Broaden student educational programs to increase enrollment

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 16

1.2.c. Data regarding the school’s performance on each measurable objective described in Criterion 1.1.d. must be provided for each of the last three years.

GOAL ONE: Raise the prominence and visibility of the Milken Institute SPH to one of the top ten schools of public health in the country. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 1: Recruit and retain a diverse and expert faculty. a. U.S. News & World Report; Top 10 Rank for AY2017/18 16 16 14 schools of public health. b. Establish state-of –the-art laboratory facilities in AY2015/16 Planned Approved by GW Designed new GW Science and Engineering Hall. Board of Trustees c. Increase endowed professorships. Ongoing 3 4 5 d. Provide competitive shared resources/cores: • Biostatistics and Epidemiology Consulting AY2013/14 Established Ongoing Ongoing Service (BECS) • StrongBox (Shared Data Platform) AY2013/14 Approved Established Ongoing • Colonial1 (Big Data Analysis/Storage) AY2015/16 _ Planned Established • Sequencing Core AY2015/16 - Approved Planned • BSL3 laboratory AY2015/16 Approved Planned e. Develop a formal and comprehensive faculty training and mentoring program: • Faculty Research Advancement AY2014/15 Approved Rollout, partial Rollout, partial • Career Development Program AY2016/17 - Planned Rollout, partial f. Increase faculty research through pilot funding Ongoing $893,000 $1,024M $972,000 and start up packages.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 17

GOAL ONE: (continued) Raise the prominence and visibility of the GW Milken Institute SPH to one of the top ten schools of public health in the country. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15

Objective 2: Recruit and enroll top-tier students. a. Increase student access to financial aid: Ongoing • Graduate assistantships (GA’s)/ $356,942 $436,320 $568,344 GRA’s/ stipends • Graduate student scholarships. $1,121,236 1,503,376 $2,651,552 b. Improve student support services: • Hire first Career Counselor AY2012/13 Approved, Hired - - • Hire first Director of Financial Aid (FA) AY2014/15 - - Approved, Hired • Hire first Assistant Dean for Student AY2014/15 - - Approved, Hired Services c. Provide flexible educational programming: • Offer online MPH (Oct census) AY2012/13 • Launched 6/13 • 107 students • 399 students • Offer executive hybrid MHA (Oct AY2013/14 - • Launched 4/14 (12 • 32 students census) students) • Offer one year MPH options (yes/no) AY2014/15 - - • 60 online students • Residential launched Fall 15 • Offer Hybrid MPH options (yes/no) AY2015/16 - - • Full launch Jan 16 d. Increase number of newly enrolled Ongoing 16 9* 23 international students.

*Note- new DrPH students only matriculate in even number years. No new DrPH students enrolled in AY 2013-14.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 18

GOAL ONE: (continued) Raise the prominence and visibility of the GW Milken Institute SPH to one of the top ten schools of public health in the country. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 3: Establish and implement a robust communications plan.* a. Redesign school website. AY2013/14 Planned Phase 1, completed Phase 2, underway

• Increase number of visits to Ongoing - 425,044 440,173 website. • Page views. Ongoing - 1,680,630 1,812,988 • Pages viewed per session. Ongoing - 3.95 4.12 b. Increase social media presence: • Facebook followers Ongoing 821 1,361 1,929 • Twitter followers 995 1,622 2,190 c. Implement communication and AY 2013/14 • Hired Media Relations Launched media relations plan for School Director • Faculty/Staff Ongoing constituents. • Purchased-Meltwater, Newsletter EurekAlert!, and • Student Newsletter Ongoing Newswise services

d. Create and market Annual Report. AY2012/13 Complete Complete Awards: • Marcom, Higher Ed Marketing Report – Gold • Hermes Creative Awards- Platinum

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 19

* When the school became independent of the Medical Center, we had to establish many of our own core functions, including communications. In March 2012, the school hired its first Executive Director of Communications. At that point the goal was to quickly establish a standalone communications function for the school. The two areas identified as being critical to the success of the school were digital communications and media relations. By September 2012 a Director of Digital Strategy and a Director of Media Relations were hired. Shortly thereafter a Web development person was added as well as a senior marketing associate. In 2013, the communications office added a Director of Events and just recently another events planner to the staff. The communication team was established from the ground up and established several critical internal and external communication processes including weekly e-newsletters, website redesign, social media strategy, media outreach strategy, google analytics. The team currently supports all faculty research promotion and all department and dean's office communications functions.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 20

GOAL TWO: Deepen the culture of excellence in education. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 1: Provide state-of-the-art facilities for teaching and learning. a. Open new SPH building AY2014/15 Construction, Building occupied 18 classrooms, 1 case study room, 3 providing optimal learning underway auditoriums; (18,700 ft2) + faculty and facilities. program offices b. Provide abundant student AY2014/15 Construction Building occupied Student space (~7,300 ft2) space for collaborative work and AY2014/15 underway private study. c. Build student library resource AY2013/14 - Built (~325 ft2) Operative space in new building, connected to printing kiosks. d. Provide cutting edge AY2013/14 Partner with Ongoing Ongoing technology for distance education. 2U Inc, provide LMS e. Design and build teaching AY2016/17 - Approved Designed; 3002 ft2 laboratory in SEH. f. Migrate physical computing AY2014/15 - Planned Pilot complete laboratories to virtual computing laboratories.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 21

GOAL TWO: (continued) Deepen the culture of excellence in education. OBJECTIVES AND TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 OUTCOMES Objective 2: Expand range of applied learning opportunities to broader community. a. Open convening center AY2013/14 Construction Building occupied 4 room center, 220 person auditorium, in new SPH building. underway and overflow room b. Offer open access AY2013/14 - 60 115 symposia, panels, forums in new building. c. Strengthen practice AY2012/13 Assoc Dean Office of Practice Ongoing Leadership. for Practice created hired d. Provide healthy lifestyle AY2013/14 Yoga Classes offered: Additional classes: classes to community. • Yoga • Dupont Circle Village Program • Metabolic Effects • Zumba

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 22

GOAL TWO: (continued) Deepen the culture of excellence in education. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 3: Deepen faculty development for teaching. a. Hire a Director of Online Learning. AY 2013/14 Approved Hired Ongoing b. Provide training for online instructors (# faculty AY2013/14 11 48 99 trained). c. Increase number of faculty completing Ongoing 21 28 11 professional development training. Objective 4: Deploy comprehensive and inclusive systems for ongoing evaluation and feedback. a. Adapt certificate programs to workforce needs. AY2012/13 Initiated Ongoing Ongoing b. Review and revamp MPH core. AY2013/14 Planned Initiated Completed c. Review methods course offerings and sequence. AY2014/15 - - Completed d. Review undergraduate education programs. AY2014/15 - - Completed e. Revamp Student feedback for practicum. AY2014/15 - Initiated Completed f. Implement a new course evaluation system. AY2013/14 Planned Planned Pilot SmartEval g. Complete academic departmental reviews: • Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Epi/Bio) AY 2013/14 - Partial Completed • Health Policy (HP) AY 2013/14 - Partial Completed • Health Services Mgt. and Leadership (HSML) AY 2013/14 - Partial Completed • Environmental and Occupational Health (EOH) AY 2013/14 - Partial Completed • Exercise and Nutrition Sciences (EXNS) AY 2014/15 - - Partial • Prevention and Community Health (PCH) AY 2014/15 - - Partial • Global Health (GH) AY 2014/15 - - Partial

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 23

GOAL THREE: Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET DATE AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 1: Foster a culture of research excellence through capacity building, collaboration, and collegiality across departments, faculty, and staff. a. Establish new SPH Office of Research Excellence. AY2013/14 • Hired Associate Hired Senior Ongoing Dean of Operations Director Research. • Established centralized pre and post-award staff within the SPH (4). b. Establish pre-award shared services model AY2013/14 - Hired 1 SPH Pre- Added 1 SPH Pre- within the Office of Research Excellence. award Specialist award Specialist c. Implement process to review and support AY 2013/14 New SPH Reviewed: Streamlined: thematic organized research units (ORUs) to guidance issued • 22 ORUs for SPH • 7 Chartered & 6 support interdisciplinary science. inclusion Non-chartered Centers • 4 Programs • 1 Core d. Increase number of federally funded AY2013/14 2 4 6 interdisciplinary ORUs with SPH PIs/leaders. • NIH (DC CFAR) • NIH (DC-CFAR) • NIH (DC-CFAR) • NIH (CTSA) • NIH (CTSA) • NIH (CTSA) • NIMHD(AVANCE) • NIMHD • IDIQ (1- HP) (AVANCE) • CDC (EBOLA) • IDIQ (2- HP/Workforce Development)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 24

GOAL THREE: (continued) Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET DATE AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 e. Establish a multi-component Faculty Research AY 2014/15 Approved Planned • Rollout partial. Advancement Program. Initial roll out included: • Initial SPH • New Faculty Boot Camp; investment • Seminar Series; ~$170K • Facilitating Funds Program; • Mentoring Program; • Scientific Writing Workshops f. Facilitate and provide pilot funding AY2012/13 and • NIH CTSA Pilot • DC-CFAR ($130K • SPH Springboard opportunities to SPH faculty. ongoing Program ($169K) awarded to SPH Program ($150K (http://ctsicn.or faculty) Awarded) g/node/155) • NIH CTSA Pilot (http://publichea • DC-CFAR Awards Program ($197K lth.gwu.edu/rese ($50K awarded Awarded) arch/faculty- to SPH faculty) research- (https://dccfar.g development) wu.edu/pilot- awards- program) g. Institute a Grants Administration Learning AY 2013/14 Established: Ongoing: Ongoing: Community to foster collaboration, professional • Target 4 • Target 8 • Target 8 development, among SPH grants management meetings/year, meetings/year, meetings/year, staff. (20 staff) (>80% (24 staff) (>80% (28 staff) (>80% attendance) attendance) attendance)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 25

GOAL THREE: (continued) Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET DATE AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 h. Enhance SPH research communications. AY 2012/13 Established: Established: Established: • SPH Research • SPH on-line • Weekly SPH Accelerator Blog Research Portal newsletter with • Weekly tailored • SPH on-line research features PIVOT reports Research Policy- • Quarterly • SPH Research Procedure Portal Research Bedrock Operations synopsis to SPH Handbook leadership

Objective 2: Provide state-of-the-art physical research facilities. a. Provide Exercise Laboratory facilities in the new AY2014/15 Construction, Building and Accomplished Milken Institute SPH Building. underway laboratories occupied b. Provide state-of-the-art Public Health AY2015/16 Business plan Approved by GW Planned and Laboratory in GW’s new Science and Engineering completed. Board of Trustees to designed 30,818 Hall (SEH). develop 7th floor of ft2: research labs, SEH for PH wet teaching lab, 26 laboratories. offices and 90 workstations.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 26

GOAL THREE: (continued) Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET DATE AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 c. Establish Public Health and Exercise Laboratory AY2015/16 Planned • Hired SPH Building • Established facility management procedures/functions. Manager. processes for • Hired Exercise Lab core facilities. Manager. • Established equipment procurement procedures. • Developed job description for hiring a PH Lab Manager. Objective 3: Increase externally funded research conducted at the SPH. a. Improve efficiencies in pre-award services. AY2013/14 Conducted SPH Established pre- Ongoing pre-award needs award shared assessment. services model within the SPH Office of Research Excellence. b. Improve efficiencies in post-award services. AY2015/16 - - Post-award needs assessment completed.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 27

GOAL THREE: (continued) Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET DATE AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 c. Provide competitive shared resources/cores. AY2013/14- Established Established HIPAA Established AY2015/16 Biostatistical-Epi secured server Strongbox, 150 Consulting users: Service (BECS): Purchased off-shelf, (Shared data http://publicheal Colonial1: analysis/ storage, th.gwu.edu/proje (‘Big Data’ analysis 10 software cts/biostatistics- and packages; VPN and- storage,http://publi and epidemiology- chealth.gwu.edu/re Onsite, http://pub consulting- search/shared-data- lichealth.gwu.edu service platform-strong- /research/shared- box) data-platform- strong-box)

Approved: • BSL-3 for Public Health Lab • Sequencing Core d. Increase NIH funding. AY2013/14 $6.4M $8.7M $9.8M e. Increase direct and indirect funding across AY2012/13 $38.6M $38.8M $43.1M departments (from $33M, FY2010). ($33.8M, Direct; ($33.5M, Direct; ($36.5M, Direct; Note: Does not include Biostatistics Center $4.8M IDC) $5.3M IDC) $6.6M IDC) f. Increase number of active awards across ranks* AY2012/13 281 285 323 (# awards). Professor=144 Professor=124 Professor=149 *Number of awards and PI’s are for active Assoc. Prof.=77 Assoc. Prof.=85 Assoc. Prof.=85 grants. Some PIs have more than one grant and Asst. Prof.=32 Asst. Prof.=41 Asst. Prof.=52 are counted more than once. Res. Scientist=28 Res. Scientist=35 Res. Scientist=40 g. Overall success rates on proposals. 40% 45% 49% 40%

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 28

GOAL THREE: (continued) Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET DATE AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 4: Enhance the scholarly output of SPH faculty, research staff, and students. a. Demonstrate impact/reach of SPH scholarship AY2015/16 251 270 254 through tracking number of publications.

Objective 5: Elevate the visibility of GW SPH research to the school, university, national, and international audiences. a. Establish protocol to disseminate research AY2012/13 Estimated Ongoing Ongoing results in multiple formats. research presence on: • SPH/GW website • research blog • Huff Post blog • Op-eds • Post press releases to Newswise and EurekAlert! b. Increased documentation of SPH presence in AY2013/14 4,000 media hits 5,466 media hits 2,882 media hits high impact news outlets.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 29

GOAL THREE: (continued) Propel the School’s interdisciplinary research portfolio to national and international prominence. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET DATE AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 6: Cultivate Doctoral and Post-doctoral research training platforms. a. Transfer the PhD in Epidemiology from CCAS to AY2013/14 - Complete 21 Students the School of Public Health. Add focus areas in EOH and Physical Activity. b. Encourage the transfer of the PhD in AY2015/16 - - Discussion with Biostatistics to the School of Public Health. CCAS c. Launch a PhD in Social and Behavioral Sciences AY2016/17 - - Approved by in PH. GW Board of Trustees, June 2015. d. Allocate endowment income to support AY2013/14 _ Funded 1 PhD Epi $87,810 to fellowships that attract top tier doctoral student ($18,172); Milken Scholars students. e. Develop and implement post-doctoral fellowship AY2013/14 4 6 8 structure; hire post-docs. (# Postdocs)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 30

GOAL FOUR: Integrate the School’s global health initiatives in alignment with GW’s institutional global impact goals. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 1: Expand expertise and leadership in global health. a. Hire a renowned scholar to chair AY2012/13 James Tielsch - - Department of Global Health. b. Other hires actively engaged in global Ongoing • Cheng Huang • Julie Fisher • Carlos Santos- health research and practice. • Mary Ellsberg • Culberto Garza Burgoa • Khadi Ndiaye • Manuel • Amanda Northcross Contreras- • Rajiv Rimal Urbina • Amira Roess • Claire Standley • Jack Sandberg (staff) • Ron Waldman • Erin Sorrell (staff) Objective 2: Establish collaborative, organized centers for Global Research and Education. a. Sumner M. Redstone Global Center for AY2013/14 - Established with GW Charter Prevention and Wellness. philanthropy planned b. Reorganize GW Center for Global Health. AY2015/16 - Planned Chartered c. Center for Social Well-Being and AY2014/15 - UNICEF Cooperative Ongoing Development. Agreement d. Antibiotic Resistance Action Center. AY2014/15 - Planned Established

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 31

GOAL FOUR: (continued) Integrate the School’s global health initiatives in alignment with GW’s institutional global impact goals. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 3: Develop model curricula for global health research and training. a. Review and restructure GH MPH tracks. AY2013/14 - Completed Ongoing b. Complete Academic Program Review. AY2014/15 - - Partial c. Increase number of students admitted to AY2015/16 12 8 15 Peace Corps International. d. Create MPH in Global Environmental 2012 Launched 9 7 Health track (# new students). e. Relaunch MPH in Global Health AY2016/17 Planned Epidemiology and Disease Control Objective 4: Develop a robust infrastructure for global research. a. Support GW Office of the Vice President AY2015/16 - - OVPR initiates for Research (OVPR) task force. process b. Cultivate highly engaged international 20 31* 12 17 practicum sites (# sites). *Note: Since Dr. Tielsch arrived, the department's focus has been on quality placements at organizations where we have growing relationships rather than simply increasing volume /quantity. Consequently, we dropped several previous sites as we build sites that will best serve our global health students.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 32

GOAL FIVE: Leverage health policy expertise to impact policies and improve public health. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 1. Build strength in health economics and global health policy. a. Increase number of full time PhD health 6 3 4 5 economists (# faculty health economists). b. Develop collaborations in global health policy AY2015/16 Medical Global Health Ongoing across departments in the SPH and across the Education Security Program University. Partnership Initiative (Africa) c. Recruit at least one faculty member in the area of AY2015/16 - - Planned (search applied global health economics/financing. open fall 2015) d. Recruit senior faculty member to direct MPH in AY2014/15 - - Hired Carlos Global Health Policy Santos-Burgoa Objective 2. Strengthen linkages between policy and management. a. Combine departments of Health Policy and AY2014/15 - Departmental Implemented Health Services, Management and Leadership. reviews b. Strengthen MPH core by linking health policy and AY2013/14 Task force Combined two Ongoing management pedagogically. convened courses into one Objective 3. Generate resources to respond to critical policy issues. a. Research awards from federal IDIQ mechanism. Ongoing $3 Million $0.7 million $2.4 Million b. Develop amicus curiae briefs related to public Ongoing - • Burwell v Hobby • King v Burwell health issues for Supreme Court or federal court Lobby • Michigan v EPA cases. • Halbig v Sebelius • Pruitt v Sebelius c. Disseminate policy briefs on timely federal and Ongoing 31 45 48 state health policy and public health issues Objective 4: Support faculty in communicating results of research to policy makers. a. Provide ongoing training and support to faculty Ongoing Formal: 8 Formal: 8 Formal: 8 members for communicating to the public (# Informal: 11 Informal:18 Informal: 19 receiving formal and informal media training*). b. Respond to policy makers need for expertise (# 28 18 19 faculty participating).

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 33

* Formal training refers to training conducted by an external, professional media consultant, while informal training is conducted in house with SPH Communications Staff.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 34

GOAL FIVE: (continued) Leverage health policy expertise to impact policies and improve public health. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 5: Redesign Health Policy curriculum to be responsive to changing workforce demands. a. Review and update Health Policy core curriculum. Ongoing Analysis course - Review (3 cr) added Fundamentals course b. Review and update Health Policy electives. Ongoing - Program review Add electives to curriculum to increase options Objective 6: Increase funding for PhD students in AY2014/15 - - $130,000 for AY Public Policy and Admin (HP track). 2016 Objective 7. Convene key stakeholders and decision makers around high priority issues. a. Host conferences and public events (# events). Ongoing - 60 115

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 35

GOAL SIX: Be at the forefront of GW institutional initiatives on citizenship and leadership. Objectives and outcomes TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 1: Recognize and reward university, community and professional service. a. Include service in annual reviews. AY2012/13 Yes Yes Yes b. Include service in department APT guidelines. AY2012/13 Yes Yes Yes Objective 2: Foster a mindset of interdisciplinary and inter-professional service leadership among faculty, staff and students. a. Support of student organizations providing AY2012/13 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing service. b. Review and modify ISCOPES to better support AY2014/15 - - Partial community engagement and service. c. Establish a faculty and student advisory board for AY 2015-16 - - In Progress Office of Practice. d. Collaborate with other university units to develop AY2014/15 - - Task force Interprofessional education vision. convened Objective 3: Expand the School’s faculty and staff-led practice-based partnerships, and the options available for the required student practicum experience. a. Increase practica partnerships. 200 136 131 168 b. Design and deploy new system to facilitate AY 2015-16 - Planned Construction practice partnerships. underway Objective 4: Engage with local institutions to develop and implement policies and programs to improve health locally. a. Launch Healthy DC. AY2015/16 - - Planning meetings held with potential partners in DC. b. Initiate a DC-Health and Nutrition Examination AY2016/17 - - Planning Survey (DC-HANES).

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 36

GOAL SIX: (continued) Be at the forefront of GW institutional initiatives on citizenship and leadership. Objectives and outcomes TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 c. Local Initiatives: • DC Developmental CFAR 2010 - 2015 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing • DC CFAR 2016 – 2021 - Planned Funded • DC DOH-SPH Public Health-Academic Partnership for HIV Epi and Surveillance 2010-2021 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing • DC DOH Leadership training 2015-2021 - Planned Initiated • DC DOH Staff Professional Development 2010 -2021 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing • GW Cancer Institute –Prevention AD 2016-2021 - - Planned • Redstone Center 2015-2021 Proposed Formative Initiated • Center for Healthy Aging 2016-2021 Proposed Proposed Funding Requested Proposed Proposed Initiated • Antibiotic Resistance Action Center 2016-2021 2014-2016 - Initiated Ongoing • IVY City Air Pollution community assistance 2015-2021 - - Initiated • Environmental Health Summit- build consortium of environmental/ occupational health researchers from 9 area universities to focus on DC Metro area issues.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 37

GOAL SEVEN: Increase financial strength. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 1: Establish a forward looking budget process that engages all SPH leadership. a. Build and implement a transparent and forward AY2014/15 - - Launched thinking budget process. b. Establish a school-wide budget committee. AY2015/16 - - Planned Objective 2: Raise $25M for construction of new 2018 $2,030,050 $3,080,125 $3,140,225 buildings. (8.1%) (12.3%) (12.6%) Objective 3: Meet GW Campaign goals. a. Identify thematic areas of giving. AY2012/13 Academics & Ongoing Ongoing Faculty Research; Student FA; Building b. Establish Redstone Center. AY2015 - Proposed and Established and funded ongoing c. Restructure Dean’s Council into Board of Advisors AY2015/16 - - Proposed and and Dean’s Alumni Council. planned d. Increase donor identification and non-affiliated AY2010-AY2021 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing donor opportunities. e. Endow and install Dean. AY2014/15 Case Statement Funded Complete f. Opening of 950 New Hampshire Avenue. AY2010-AY2015 Construction Move offices; Move classrooms grand opening and exercise labs g. Dedication of Southby Conference Room. AY2015 Proposed Committed Funded; opened h. Alumni outreach and events. AY2010-AY2021 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing i. Increase faculty and staff giving rate. AY2010-2021 11.0% 11.2% 14.85% j. Increase Alumni giving rate. AY2010-AY2021 4.76% 5.05% 5.1%

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 38

GOAL SEVEN: (continued) Increase financial strength. OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES TARGET AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 Objective 4: Create more opportunities for revenue growth. a. Build student enrollment to sustainable levels. AY2016/17 1,101 1,156 1,428 b. Build event revenue stream. AY2012-AY2018 $0 (no building) $0 (no $77,491 building) c. Maintain indirect cost recoveries sufficient to Ongoing $4.6M $4.8M $5.2M support research facilities and administration.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 39

1.2.d. Description of the manner in which the self-study document was developed, including effective opportunities for input by important school constituents, including institutional officers, administrative staff, faculty, students, alumni and representatives of the public health community.

Strategic planning and outreach to both internal and external constituencies has been a priority of the Dean since her arrival in August 2010. A large emphasis has been placed on communications and engagement.

An experienced Associate Dean for Academic Affairs was hired in August of 2011. Part of her charge was to begin preparing the school for our self-study while also simultaneously leading the path for the academic agenda of this school. The Associate Dean has dedicated much of the last four years towards strengthening the School’s academic infrastructure and preparing us for the self-study process by:

• Partnering with the Provost’s Office, the Registrar and other entities in GW’s central administrative offices to overhaul data systems to more effectively track trends. This has been especially complex in the context of the former Medical Center (which often did not update data about the SPH in central systems) as well as the reorganization process (which required multiple recoding efforts);

• Leading a process with the SPH Curriculum Committee faculty members to overhaul the School’s core MPH curriculum and ensure processes for regular review of the core;

• Restructuring the offices of Student Affairs and Admissions to create operations that meet the increased expectations within governance and service to the School’s student population and to streamline processes to increase efficiencies;

• Addressing a number of aspects of our strategic plan: (1) bringing innovative program offerings such as the distance education and online/executive education platforms; (2) developing the one-year MPH track; (3) leading processes to improve undergraduate education; (4) supporting the development and approval of our new PhD programs; and (5) leading processes to reassess our approaches to quantitative and qualitative analyses;

• Supporting our faculty in the creation of the new MPH tracks in Global Environmental Health and Public Health Nutrition, and in obtaining approval for the new PhD in Social and Behavioral Sciences in Public Health;

• Refining the certificate and degree offerings to position the School to meet the ever-changing demands of the industry. This also resulted in elimination of the MPH, Public Health Management track, the MS, Exercise Science, Clinical Exercise Physiology concentration, the BS, Exercise Science, Pre-Dietetics concentration, the Minor in Health and Wellness and 15 certificate tracks;

• Building cross-cutting collaborations with other Schools at the University to further increase the students’ accessibility to a larger portfolio of academic/practice offerings;

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 40

• Establishing a faculty-driven process to prepare the Self-Study document itself; and

• Engaging student participation as ambassadors of the school, departmental liaisons, participants in new student webinars, and active members of all school committees (exempt APT).

In the spring of 2014, the SPH Dean appointed an accreditation working group representing all academic departments and led by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. This group met regularly throughout the year and into the spring of 2015 and served as the liaisons to each department to both gather information and keep all faculty informed at monthly departmental faculty meetings. Other key constituents were included for input and comment throughout, including: student leadership and subject matter experts (online program directors, undergraduate directors, finance director, executive director of communications). The Associate Dean reported progress at all Executive Advisory Committee meetings and faculty assemblies held between January 2014 and the present. The Dean and the Departmental Chairs reviewed the preliminary drafts. In June 2015, the Dean held a half-day retreat for all deans, department chairs, major unit department heads, and the accreditation working group for a review and discussion of the draft document.

Faculty, students, alumni, advisory boards and key university officials have received copies of the self- study report. Public comments have been solicited to a dedicated site: [email protected]. Constituents were notified through targeted emails, social media and faculty, staff and student newsletters. See ERF 1.2.d.: Third Party Comments.

1.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The School strategic planning and monitoring process is ongoing. • Evaluation occurs at the departmental, school and university levels.

Challenges: • Multiple systems to collect data are not adequately connected. Despite our best efforts to improve data systems and our access to systems at GW, collating data for departmental reviews and the CEPH Self-Study continues to require a tremendous effort on the part of Deans, departmental representatives, Chairs, Executive Directors, and staff.

Future Plans: • Start the next Strategic Planning Cycle in Spring 2016. This effort will be informed not only by the CEPH report but also a comprehensive review of our progress under the current strategic plan, an environmental reassessment, engagement of the new Dean’s Advisory Board and Alumni Advisory Council, and the involvement of many of our newer faculty members who were not on board in 2014.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 41

1.3. INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT. THE SCHOOL SHALL BE AN INTEGRAL PART OF AN ACCREDITED INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND SHALL HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF INDEPENDENCE AND STATUS ACCORDED TO PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS IN THAT INSTITUTION.

1.3.a. A brief description of the institution in which the school is located, and the names of accrediting bodies (other than CEPH) to which the institution responds.

GW Mission Statement: http://trustees.gwu.edu/gw-mission-statement

The George Washington University, an independent, private academic institution chartered by an Act of Congress of the United States in 1821, dedicates itself to furthering human well-being. The University values a dynamic, student-focused community stimulated by cultural and intellectual diversity and built upon a foundation of integrity, creativity and openness to the exploration of new ideas.

The George Washington University, centered in the national and international crossroads of Washington, D.C., commits itself to excellence in the creation, dissemination and application of knowledge.

To promote the process of lifelong learning from both global and integrative perspectives, the University provides a stimulating intellectual environment for its diverse students and faculty. By fostering excellence in teaching, the University offers outstanding learning experiences for full-time and part-time students in undergraduate, graduate and professional programs in Washington, D.C., across the nation, and abroad. As a center for intellectual inquiry and research, the University emphasizes the linkage between basic and applied scholarship, insisting that the practical be grounded in knowledge and theory. The University acts as a catalyst for creativity in the arts, the sciences and the professions by encouraging interaction among its students, faculty, staff, alumni and the communities it serves.

The George Washington University draws upon the rich array of resources from the National Capital Area to enhance its educational endeavors. In return, the University, through its students, faculty, staff and alumni, contributes talent and knowledge to improve the quality of life in metropolitan Washington, D.C.

Governing Documents:

• The Charter of the George Washington University • Bylaws of the George Washington University

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 42

GW History GW is the largest institution of higher education in the District of Columbia. We have more than 20,000 students—from all 50 states, the District and more than 130 countries—studying a broad range of disciplines: from forensic science and creative writing to international affairs and computer engineering, as well as medicine, public health, the law and public policy.

GW comprises three campuses—Foggy Bottom and Mount Vernon in Washington, D.C., and the GW Virginia Science and Technology Campus in Ashburn, Va.—as well as several graduate education centers in the metropolitan area and Hampton Roads, Va. Within its 10 schools are full-time 2,260 faculty.

In addition to The Milken Institute School of Public Health, GW has nine other schools which are (in order of their establishment):

• Columbian College of Arts and Sciences • School of Medicine and Health Sciences • GW Law • School of Engineering and Applied Science • Graduate School of Education and Human Development • School of Business • Elliott School of International Affairs • College of Professional Studies • School of Nursing

Information regarding the accrediting bodies for all ten schools can be found at: https://academicplanning.gwu.edu/accreditation-gw.

1.3.b. One of more organizational charts of the university indicating the school’s relationship to the other components of the institution, including reporting lines.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 43

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 44

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 45

1.3.c. Description of the school’s level of autonomy and authority regarding the following: budgetary authority and decisions relating to resource allocation; lines of accountability, including access to higher-level university officials; personnel recruitment, selection and advancement, including faculty and staff; and academic standards and policies, including establishment and oversight of curricula.

Financial Oversight The central division of the Executive Vice President and Treasurer (EVPT) oversee all of the financial resources of the University. There exist two budget models for the various schools at the George Washington University. Most of the schools are considered “open units”, and as such, are managed collectively by the Executive Vice President and Treasurer’s Office which makes planning, resource allocation and other budgetary decisions on behalf of those units.

The Schools of Public Health, Medicine, and Law are considered “closed units”. They have a higher degree of autonomy due to the size and scope of each of these schools. They also have more responsibility for managing their revenues and expenses. The Executive Vice President and Treasurer’s Office supervises the SPH Finance Director and certain decisions related to resource allocation must be approved by that office. Thus, while the closed units have a higher degree of autonomy, these three schools still work very closely with the Executive Vice President and Treasurer’s Office on all aspects of budgetary authority and resource allocation.

While the School of Public Health is able to recruit and advance staff and faculty through the decentralized authority given to the School, we do adhere to all University policies related to selection and promotion for both staff and faculty. All decisions require coordination and approval through the University Human Resources Division as well as the Office of Faculty Recruitment and Personnel Relations. Key positions within the School maintain reporting lines to the President, Provost, Treasurer and the division of University Human Resources (HR).

The SPH is free to make investments in equipment or personnel and is responsible for funding these investments from its revenue and for responsibly managing its financial reserves. Like all of the closed unit schools the SPH pays allocation fees to the central GW Administration for services such as Registrar, Office of General Counsel, Accounting, Research Administration, etc. The operation and financing of school buildings, along with the negotiation and payment of leases, are the responsibility of all closed unit schools. Additionally, the closed unit schools fund deficits and build reserves based on their annual operating results. Finally, the Himmelfarb Medical Library and the SPH Research Laboratories are operated in SMHS facilities and the SPH reimburses the SMHS for them via Shared Service Agreements. There are multiple other interdepartmental transfers as well, to handle issues such as facilities rentals, security and housekeeping.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 46

Faculty Recruitment and Advancement The departmental faculty determine the need for additional faculty and department chairs request searches from the Dean annually. The Dean reports to the Provost and annually makes a request to the Provost to approve SPH requests for faculty searches. Faculty Affairs functions are administered by a staff person of the School who coordinates with Provost Office staff. All SPH faculty are recruited and hired in accordance with University policy as defined by the Office of Faculty Recruitment and Personnel Relations. An overview of the complete hiring process and other documents related to faculty recruitment and hiring can be found in ERF 1.3.c.: Overview of Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Process for Faculty and Librarians and Faculty Diversity Advocate and Degree Verification Policy. Searches that are approved are carried out by faculty search committees in accordance with SPH by- laws and the University Faculty Code. Requests for faculty appointments, promotion and tenure (APT) are initiated by Department Chairs to departmental APT committees, which report their decisions to a school-wide committee that advises the Dean regarding her recommendations to the Provost. The SPH Faculty Affairs Office assures that all faculty searches and hires adhere to university and SPH policies.

Staff Recruitment As is true for all units in GW, Human Resources (HR) Client Partners who directly report to the central University HR Office lead HR efforts in the School. Staff positions are also recruited and hired in accordance with University policy: http://hr.gwu.edu/hiring-process.

Academic Oversight The SPH departments and freestanding programs each have a curriculum committee. These departmental and programmatic committees provide the first layer of curriculum review and improvement, approval of e new programs and courses and changes to existing curriculum within the department. Other more significant program changes, such as the development of new programs or courses, curricular changes to requirements for existing programs, significant course changes such as credit levels, etc. must be reviewed and approved by the SPH Curriculum Committee and finally by the Provost’s Office prior to implementation. The GW Council of Doctoral Programs, the Provost, and the Board of Trustees must review and approve new doctoral programs.

1.3.d. Identification of any of the above processes that are different for the school of public health than for other professional schools, with an explanation.

As mentioned in Criteria 1.3.c., the Schools of Public Health, Medicine, and Law are considered closed units while the rest of the schools are open units. A brief explanation of the closed unit model has already been provided in Criteria 1.3.c. To our knowledge there is no significant different between these processes among those three professional schools.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 47

1.3.e. If a collaborative school, description of all participating institutions and delineation of their relationships to the school.

Not applicable.

1.3.f. If a collaborative school, a copy of the formal written agreement that establishes the rights and obligations of the participating universities in regard to the school’s operation.

Not applicable.

1.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The School of Public Health has the same organizational standing as all other Schools and Colleges of the University. • The “open” budgetary model provides a higher level of financial autonomy than does the “closed” model. • The university exercises strong oversight for critical financial and HR functions while allowing the SPH the same degree of autonomy as similar professional schools (law and medicine) at GW. • All programs of the School that are eligible for accreditation by an outside body are accredited.

Challenges: • None

Future Plans: • None

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 48

1.4 ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION. THE SCHOOL SHALL PROVIDE AN ORGANIZATIONAL SETTING CONDUCIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH LEARNING, RESEARCH AND SERVICE. THE ORGANIZATIONAL SETTING SHALL FACILITATE INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION, COOPERATION AND COLLABORATION THAT CONTRIBUTE TO ACHIEVING THE SCHOOL’S PUBLIC HEALTH MISSION. THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE SHALL EFFECTIVELY SUPPORT THE WORK OF THE SCHOOL’S CONSTITUENTS.

1.4.a. One or more organizational charts showing the administrative organization of the school, indicating relationships among its component offices, departments, divisions or other administrative units.

The Milken Institute SPH has four Associate Deans and six academic department Chairs reporting to Dean Goldman in addition to several operational department heads.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 49

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 50

1.4.b. Description of the roles and responsibilities of major units in the organizational chart.

Dean. Lynn R Goldman, MD, MS, MPH, Professor of Environmental and Occupational Health and the Michael and Lori Milken Dean, is responsible for the oversight of all academic, student, operational, research, financial and service functions of the SPH. The Dean represents the School to the University, alumni, donors, regulatory bodies, and governmental institutions at local, national and international levels. The Dean ensures the continued success of the School. The Dean reports to the provost of the university.

Senior Associate Dean. Glenn Paulson, PhD, Professor of Environmental and Occupational Health, is serving as the interim Senior Associate Dean for AY2015/16. In this role he ensures that the School has a sound administrative and financial infrastructure that effectively supports its research, educational and public health missions, through coordination of finances and management of resources, capital expenditures, physical infrastructure and business and finance functions. He oversees all fiscal affairs of the School, including preparation and oversight of the operating budget, monitoring cash flow and expenditure plans, fund management and grants and contracts management. This position reports to the Dean of the School.

Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs. Julie A. DeLoia, PhD, Professor of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, provides leadership and vision for the school's educational mission as the Milken Institute SPH continues to solidify its reputation for excellence in innovative and integrative public health curriculum. The position provides leadership, management and coordination to ensure excellence in all areas of undergraduate education and graduate education, and doctoral training, including our online programs. Major areas of responsibility include oversight of all academic programs and curriculum, accreditation of several programs within the School, student support and student performance, and recruitment and admissions. The Associate Dean has been intimately involved in the programming aspects of the new academic building the School occupied in 2014. Dr. DeLoia reports to the Dean of the School and serves on the SPH Leadership Group, the SPH Curriculum Committee and the SPH Admissions Committee as well as a number of university-wide academic committees.

Associate Dean for Research. Kimberly Horn, EdD, MSW, Professor of Prevention and Community Health, provides vision and leadership for the SPH’s research mission as it promotes and builds its extramural funding base, expands its reputation for scholarly excellence, and maintains its commitment to practice-based and interdisciplinary research. The Associate Dean is expected to be both a catalyst and guiding force with the SPH Research Committee as the SPH plans and develops major new research initiatives and externally funded research centers. Current areas of research focus in the SPH include: health policy, health law, global health interventions and partnerships, violence prevention, HIV/AIDS epidemiology and treatment, obesity reduction, health information technology, health quality, health services and outcomes research, occupational safety, children’s environmental health, cardiac disease,

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 51

and healthy aging. Dr. Horn reports to the Dean of the SPH and serves on the SPH Leadership Group and the Research Committee, as well as a number of university-wide research committees.

Associate Dean for Practice. Pierre Vigilance, MD, MPH and Professor of Global Health, is responsible for facilitating the continued development of the practice mission and service learning programs within the SPH. The Associate Dean provides leadership for the development, implementation, and evaluation of all practicum/internship/residency/and service learning activities. This position oversees ISCOPES. Dr. Vigilance reports to the Dean of the SPH and serves on the SPH Leadership Group as well as the Practice Directors Committee. Dr. Vigilance often represents the SPH with the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government health committees, the local chapter of the APHA and other efforts involving our practice partners.

Department Chairs. Department Chairs work closely with department faculty on all aspects of the work of the department including student admissions, program management, fiscal management, grant application and research production. Each Department Chair is responsible for faculty development, provides input into the appointment, tenure and promotion decisions and conducts annual evaluations of all faculty. The Department Chairs manage the teaching, service, and research activities of the department and are responsible for their department budgets. The Dean and the Senior Associate Dean meet with the Department Chairs on a monthly basis. The Department Chairs report directly to Dean Goldman.

Senior Advisor. Natasha Kazeem. The Senior Advisor reports directly to the Dean and represents the Dean in key meetings, as well as accompanies the Dean to major events/meetings, and facilitates the pre and post interactions to ensure successful outcomes and effective communications across the School. The Senior Advisor prioritizes events and issues for the Dean and handles issues that impact operations while managing the Dean’s commitments, as well as develops recommendations to improve operational performance, analyzes business operations, processes and services to evaluate performance and determine areas of potential cost reduction, program improvement or policy change. This position directs, plans and implements objectives and activities to ensure continuing operations and maximization of productivity while providing counsel and coaching to assist leadership, departments and teams with annual and long-term planning, group problem solving and process and service improvement.

Assistant Dean for Student Services. Ms. Helen Klepac is responsible for directing and overseeing the overall activities related to student recruitment, retention and completion of degree, as well as providing services for undergraduate and graduate learners. The Assistant Dean assists in enrollment forecasting and participates with the leadership team in developing long-term growth strategies. She also works with University offices to help bring efficiencies to the admissions and enrollment processes, including financial aid, student accounts and registration. The Assistant Dean reports to the Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 52

Assistant Dean for MPH Programs. Taylor Burke, JD, LLM, Associate Professor of Health Policy and Management, serves as the Assistant Dean for MPH Programs. In this role, Professor Burke serves as the academic lead advocate for the MPH program as a whole and chair of a newly formed MPH committee. He also serves on the Curriculum Committee and the Admissions Committee on an ad hoc basis. He is responsible for leading periodic reviews of the MPH curriculum and managing MPH administrative staff members. He reports to the Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs.

Financial Director. Steven Doherty, the SPH Financial Director (FD) is responsible for developing and directing the budget process and overall business planning of the School and interacts with the relevant University financial offices in collection and generation of financial data. The FD works with department administrators on oversight and reporting on the financial performance of the School compared to the annual budget; review of income and expenditures for accuracy; quarterly projections; explaining major variances; and, when needed, developing corrective actions. The Financial Director manages all financial reporting for the School. This position directs salary administration functions, reviews contracts to ensure compliance and budgets, and assesses business plans for contracts. The Financial Director develops financial analyses for new business opportunities, both internal and external, and ensures that appropriate systems and policies/procedures are in place to manage the School’s business in compliance with institutional policies and regulations, as well as any external financial requirements. The Financial Director reports to an official in the VPFA’s office and has a functional reporting line to the Interim Senior Associate Dean.

Executive Director of Communications. Stacey DiLorenzo works with the GW External Relations Office to place features, news stories, and advertisements in local, regional and national media, conducts background research and prepares and implements strategic plans to accomplish the Milken Institute SPH communication and promotional goals, manages all internal communications, oversees all web content for the School, and manages all social media strategies. The Executive Director works with faculty members to develop editorial articles on issues for general media as well as professional publications, works in conjunction with faculty to design conferences and workshops around important issues, works with faculty to identify and secure prominent media personalities and communications scholars to serve as guest lecturers for classes and special programs, and provides faculty media training. Her team creates projects designed to attract prospective students, faculty peers from other institutions, and medical professionals as well as the production of SPH periodicals, publications and research reports. Ms. DiLorenzo reports to the Dean of the School.

Assistant Vice President of Development and Alumni Relations. Ruth Swanson works closely with the Dean, her senior leadership team, faculty, the School’s development and alumni relations staff, the Dean’s Advisory Board and senior members of GW’s Department of Alumni Relations to establish programs for the identification, cultivation and solicitation of high priority donor prospects. The position coordinates and supports fundraising efforts of the Milken Institute’s Dean’s Advisory Board and those of other campaign-related volunteers. The AVP, Development and Alumni relations is responsible for

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 53

developing and executing annual and long-term development plans to create philanthropic strategies that advance the SPH priority programs and significant fundraising goals, and oversees data management for the pool of prospects to ensure the accurate capture of prospect tracking, stage progression, contact reports, proposals, philanthropic capacity/inclination and biographical data.

The Assistant Vice President reports directly to the Associate Vice President for Development and Campaign Director within the division of Development and Alumni Relations and has a functional reporting line to the Dean of the School.

1.4.c. Description of the manner in which interdisciplinary coordination, cooperation, and collaboration occur and support public health learning, research and service.

Instructional Activities Public health, by its very nature, is interdisciplinary. Within the School, there are many avenues of collaboration and cooperation. Learning across disciplines is facilitated through: 1) courses that are taught by faculty from more than one department (examples: PubH 6001, PubH 6006, PubH 6437); 2) academic programs sponsored by more than one department (MPH in Global Environmental Health, MPH@GW, BS-PH) or more than one school (joint degree programs); 3) courses taught by faculty in department other than the department offering the course or program ( PubH 6277, PubH 6552, PubH 6561); and 4) seminars and symposia that are open to all of the SPH community.

The School provides public health education to the broader university by offering undergraduate courses in Health and Wellness (HLWL) as well as Lifestyle and Physical Activity (LSPA), opening our graduate level courses to non-SPH majors, and through joint degrees and certificate programs. At the undergraduate level, we also offer a minor in Public Health to non-majors (~70 students/year). The Master of Public Policy (Health Policy Track), conferred by the Trachtenberg School of Public Policy includes both required and recommended courses from the School of Public Health (http://tspppa.gwu.edu/health-policy), as does the PhD in Health Policy (https://tspppa.gwu.edu/phd- field-health-policy). The Master of Science in Biostatistics, offered by the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences is jointly administered and taught with the Milken Institute SPH Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics.

Interdisciplinary Scholarship Currently, our SPH has eight Chartered Centers; five Unchartered Centers; four Programs and one Core. All these ORUs are described on our website: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/research/centers-institutes.

By nature, the Centers and Institutes are actively engaged in the conduct of integrative multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary scholarship, including research and/or educational activities, and require involvement of faculty from multiple SPH departments and, for Institutes, at least two GW colleges or schools.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 54

Thesis committees for doctoral students often include faculty members from more than one department as well.

Governance and Oversight All of the Standing Committees of the school (See Criteria 1.5) include representation from all departments and students (except for APT, which does not include students).

Faculty Recruitment and Appointments Search committees for faculty recruitment include subject matter experts regardless of departmental affiliation. Major searches, such as for an endowed professorship, a chair or a dean, include faculty from many departments as well. Many faculty hold secondary or joint appointments in a second department, which helps facilitate both communication and interdisciplinary research.

Service Activities Our students and faculty are involved in service at many levels; through formal service organizations such as ISCOPES (http://smhs.gwu.edu/iscopes/), service learning at the undergraduate level, and participation in funded projects such as the Avance Center (http://avancegw.org/our-work/adelante/). More information about service activities that support public health are enumerated in Criteria 3.2.

1.4.d Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The School actively promotes collaboration through learning, scholarship and service. • The new physical building enables cross-departmental experiences. • The School is committed to providing a structure by which interdisciplinary academic scholarship, research and teaching can flourish. • SPH and GW Centers and Institutes support interdisciplinary scholarship. • SPH has developed partnerships within the University and externally in order to increase the exposure of our faculty and students to some of the most current public health challenges. • The School has promoted collaboration through established taskforces, teams and committees both internal and external to the School.

Challenges: • None identified.

Future Plans: • Create a formal Antibiotic Resistance Action Center • Explore additional collaborative degree offerings with The School of Medicine and Health Sciences and the School of Nursing on healthcare informatics.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 55

1.5 GOVERNANCE. THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION AND FACULTY SHALL HAVE CLEARLY DEFINED RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES CONCERNING SCHOOL GOVERNANCE AND ACADEMIC POLICIES. STUDENTS SHALL, WHERE APPROPRIATE, HAVE PARTICIPATORY ROLES IN THE CONDUCT OF SCHOOL AND PROGRAM EVALUATION PROCEDURES, POLICY SETTING AND DECISION MAKING.

1.5.a. A list of school standing and important ad hoc committees, with a statement of charge, composition and current membership for each.

The minutes for the 2014-2015 academic year for each Standing Committee can be found in ERF 1.5.a.: Committee Meeting Notes. Unless otherwise noted, chairs are elected annually by committee members.

Table 1.5.a.1: Standing Committees STANDING COMMITTEES APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE COMMITTEE

Charge Composition Current Membership The Committee on Six tenured members of the Avi Dor, PhD (HPM), Chair Appointments, Promotions, regular, active-status faculty Loretta DiPietro, PhD (EXNS) and Tenure shall be of the School: one elected by Doug Evans, PhD (PCH) organized and shall operate the regular, active-status Jeanne Jordan, PhD (Epi/Bio) consistent with the faculty of each department. Lance Price, PhD (EOH) provisions of Title IV of the James Tielsch, PhD (GH) Faculty Code and Section B 3-year staggered terms. of the Procedures for the Implementation of the Chair elected annually by Faculty Code with regard to committee members. criteria and procedures for appointment, promotion, and tenure of faculty.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 56

Table 1..a.1: STANDING COMMITTEES, (continued) CURRICULUM COMMITTEE

Charge Composition Current Membership The Curriculum Committee Six members of the regular, George Gray, PhD (EOH), shall function consistent active-status faculty of the Chair with Section D of the School, one elected by the Sarah Baird, PhD (GH) Procedures for the regular, active-status faculty Leonard Friedman, PhD Implementation of the of each department; one (HPM) Faculty Code to provide for student selected by the Manya Magnus, PhD faculty participation in PHSA, without vote; (Epi/Bio) decisions of the School Associate Dean for Academic Todd Miller, PhD (EXNS) relating to the addition, Affairs, ex officio, without Amita Vyas, PhD (PCH) revision, or elimination of vote. curricular offerings. It shall Ex-Officio: monitor the quality of 3-year staggered terms for Julie DeLoia, PhD, Associate education and assess the faculty Dean for Academic Affairs attainment of the stated Student is selected annually. Taylor Burke, JD, LLM, goals and objectives of the Assistant Dean for MPH School. Chair elected annually by Programs committee members. Student Representative: Ariel Sherman

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 57

Table 1.5.a.1: STANDING COMMITTEES, (continued) GRADUATE STUDENT ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE

Charge Composition Current Membership The Graduate Student Up to two members per Jane Hyatt Thorpe, JD (HPM), Admissions Committee shall department are elected by Co-Chair provide for faculty the active-status faculty of Melissa Napolitano, PhD participation in decisions the department, for a (PCH), Co-Chair relating to the admission of maximum total of 12; one Jay Graham, PhD (EOH) graduate students to the vote per department. One Heather Young, PhD School. It shall determine student, non-voting, (Epi/Bio) school-wide admissions selected by the PHSA. Geoffrey Hudson, PhD policies, advise as to Associate Dean for Academic (EXNS) recruitment and admissions Affairs, ex officio, without Khadi Ndiaye, PhD (GH) procedures, and regularly vote. Leah Masselink, PhD (HPM) review progress towards One representative each for meeting admissions goals. DrPH Admissions and for Ex-Officio: MPH Programs are also Julie DeLoia, PhD, Associate serving without vote and will Dean for Academic Affairs be incorporated into the Bylaws. Helen Klepac, MA, Assistant Dean for Student Services One-year terms. Marsha Regenstein, PhD, Chair elected annually by Program Director for DrPH committee members. Taylor Burke, JD, LLM, Assistant Dean for MPH Programs

Affiliated Staff: Tracie Seward (Admissions)

Student Representative: Rebecca Longhany

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 58

Table 1.5.a.1: STANDING COMMITTEES, (continued) EXECUTIVE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Composition Current Membership The Executive Advisory • Chairs of each SPH Chairs: Committee shall advise the Dean department Melissa Perry, ScD (EOH) on all matters affecting the • Dean and Associate Deans of Alan Greenberg, MD organization, operation, and the School (Epi/Bio) Loretta DiPietro, welfare of the School. • Three members of the PhD (EXNS) regular, active-status James Tielsch, PhD (GH) faculty elected by the Leighton Ku, PhD (HPM) regular, active-status Rajiv Rimal, PhD (PCH) faculty of the School, serving staggered three- Deans: year terms. Lynn Goldman, MD, MPH, • President of the Public Dean, Chair of Committee Health Student Association, Glenn Paulson, PhD, Interim elected annually. Senior Associate Dean Julie DeLoia, PhD, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Kim Horn, EdD, Associate Dean for Research Pierre Vigilance, MD, MPH, Associate Dean for Public Health Practice Taylor Burke, JD, LLM, Assistant Dean for MPH Programs

Elected Faculty Representatives: Anne Markus, PhD, JD (HPM) Monique Turner, PhD (PCH) Kate Applebaum, ScD (EOH)

Public Health Student Association President 2015- 16: Amanda Quintana

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 59

Table 1.5.a.1: STANDING COMMITTEES, (continued) RESEARCH

Charge Composition Current Membership The Research Committee Six faculty members, one Lance Price, PhD (EOH), Chair shall provide for faculty elected by the active-status Leighton Ku, PhD (HPM) participation in decisions faculty of each department; Irene Kuo, PhD (Epi/Bio) relating to the research the Associate Dean for Kimberly Robien, PhD (EXNS) activities of the School. Research, ex officio, without Kathleen Roche, PhD (PCH) vote; one student John Sandberg, PhD (GH) representing each of the two doctoral programs of the Administrative Appointment: SPH (PhD and DrPH), elected Kimberly Horn, EdD, by the doctoral students; Associate Dean for Research non-voting. Student Representatives: One-year terms. Maliha Ali, DrPH candidate Heather Hussey, PhD Chair elected annually by candidate committee members.

STUDENT ACADEMIC APPEALS

Charge Composition Current Membership The Student Academic Six members elected by the George Gray, PhD (EOH), Appeals Committee shall regular, active-status faculty Chair provide for faculty of the School. Mark Edberg, PhD (PCH) participation in decisions Heather Hoffman, PhD relating to appeals by 3-year terms, staggered. (Epi/Bio) students of grades and Cheng Huang, PhD (GH) decisions that alter a Holly Mead, PhD (HPM) student's academic status. Chair elected annually by Amanda Visek, PhD (EXNS) committee members. Ex-Officio: Julie DeLoia, PhD, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 60

Table 1.5.a.2 Ad Hoc Committees AD HOC COMMITTEES PRACTICE COMMITTEE Responsibilities Composition Current Membership The committee began reporting Associate Dean for Public Health Pierre Vigilance, MD, MPH, to the Faculty Assembly on Practice; Practice Directors of all Associate Dean for Public Health September 24, 2013. It will have departments; one System Practice, Chair of Committee a formal charge if it becomes a Support representative. Ann Goldman, MA, MPH standing committee under the (Epi/Bio) Bylaws. In the meantime, it Toni Thibeaux, MPH (Epi/Bio) oversees the design and Peter LaPuma, PhD, MBA, MS execution of practice programs (EOH) at the SPH. Sabrina McCormick, PhD, MA (EOH) Loretta DiPietro, PhD, MPH, MS (EXNS) Kimberly Robien, PhD, MS (EXNS) Shaneka Thurman, MS (GH) Ronald Waldman, MD, MPH (GH) Lara Cartwright-Smith, JD, MPH (HPM) Mary-Beth Malcarney, JD, MPH (HPM) Karyn Pomerantz, MPH, MLS (PCH) Tamara Henry, EdD, MA (PCH) Kelley Vargo, (MPH@GW) Sarah Kennedy, (MPH@GW) Brandon Stumbo, IT Systems Support

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 61

Table 1.5.a.2.: AD HOC COMMITTEES, (continued) STUDENT AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD Responsibilities Composition Current Membership In March 2013, the Faculty 17 voting members: 2 Peter LaPuma, PhD (EOH) Assembly approved the undergraduate students, 7 Brenda Trejo (EOH Student) following proposal: In response graduate students, one doctoral Ann Goldman, MA, MPH to strategic objectives to student and 7 members of the (Epi/Bio) enhance the student experience faculty reflecting the diversity of Abbey Wolverton (Epi/Bio and build a stronger academic the SPH. The Assistant Dean of Student) community, the SPH proposes a Student Services serves as an ex Jerry Danoff, PhD (EXNS) Student Affairs Advisory Board officio member in a non-voting TBD (EXNS Student) responsible for the following: capacity. Uriyoan Colon Ramos, ScD (GH) • Providing a forum for Rosalind Fennell (GH Student) students and faculty to Members of the Board are Lara Cartwright-Smith, JD, MPH discuss concerns which appointed by the Dean for one- (HPM) impact the student year terms from among students Rachel Gunsalus (HPM Student) experience; and faculty who are nominated Bart Bingenheimer, PhD (PCH) • Suggesting ways to improve by their peer groups. Zannah Herridge Meyer (PCH procedures and customer Student) service in the SPH Student Laura Longman (BSPH Student) Affairs Office and in Arvin Singh (MPH@GW Student) University student support Jessica Fung Deerin (PhD offices; Student) • Identifying opportunities to Maya Gerstein (DrPH Student) enhance student learning; • Developing strategies for Ex-Officio: improving student life. Helen Klepac, Assistant Dean for Student Services

1.5.b. Description of the school’s governance and committee structure’s roles and responsibilities relating to the following: general school policy development; planning and evaluation; budget and resource allocation; student recruitment, admission and award of degrees; faculty recruitment, retention, promotion and tenure; academic standards and policies, including curriculum, development; and research and service expectations and policies.

General school policy development: Any of the Standing Committees can recommend changes to school policy. Departments often suggest changes as well. Faculty and staff members on university-wide committees will communicate the impact of broader changes for discussion by school leadership. These suggestions are vetted by the Dean and discussed with the Executive Advisory Committee. As appropriate, some policy changes may need to go through the Faculty Assembly for discussion and approval. Task forces are created ad hoc when needed. (Current example is the ad hoc committee to examine yearly student and faculty awards.)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 62

Planning and Evaluation: Each Standing Committee has responsibilities to discharge (see School bylaws) and must report to the Executive Advisory Committee and to the Faculty Assembly. As noted earlier, the School undertakes a number of periodic evaluations at the School, departmental and program levels. Any major changes resulting from any planning effort requires a financial review to determine resource allocation.

Budget and resource allocation: The overall resource allocation is the responsibility of the Dean of the School, who works closely with the Finance Director, Senior Associate Dean, and the Senior Advisor to the Dean on these matters. Each year the School leadership (Chairs, Associate Deans, Executive Directors) provides the Dean with budget requests for the upcoming year, which are evaluated by the Dean and Finance Director.

Student Recruitment: Student recruitment is a joint effort of the academic departments and the Graduate Admissions Committee. The Graduate Admissions Committee determines policy and standards for admission to all programs and works closely with individual faculty members on best practices for applicant engagement and yield. Our admissions team ensures completeness of applications before sending them to the faculty for review. The University provides relevant data to the School through the Graduate Enrollment Management committee for graduate students and the Undergraduate Admissions for the bachelor degree programs.

Admission and award of degrees: Degrees are conferred three times per year, in January, May, and August. Each School is responsible for certifying that its students have met all degree requirements. GW uses DegreeMap, an online advising and degree auditing system, as a tool to track each student’s progress toward the degree requirements for the student’s individual program of study. DegreeMap applies the student’s individual academic history to those requirements. Faculty advisors monitor the student’s academic progress throughout their program. Upon receipt of the application for graduation, the SPH Office of Student Affairs conducts the final degree audit of the student’s record and submits the graduation clearance to the GW Office of the Registrar. The GW Office of the Registrar posts the degree awarded to the transcript and orders the diploma.

Faculty recruitment, retention, promotion, and tenure: Within the framework of university and SPH policy, academic departments determine policies and credentials for hiring individual faculty members. Details of how searches are conducted are included in the ERF 1.3.c.: Overview of Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Process for Faculty and Librarians. Each department has its own Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committee, which reviews all candidates and recommends rank and tenure status of the hire to the Chair of the department, who then makes his/her recommendation to the School APT Committee and the Dean. Final hiring decisions are made by the Provost upon recommendation by the Dean. Tenure decisions are made by the Board of Trustees upon recommendation by the Provost. All faculty participate in an annual review with the department chair, to review progress toward tenure/promotion. Pre-tenure faculty are offered a dossier review prior to being put forward for a tenure decision.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 63

Academic standards and policies, including curriculum development: Curriculum development occurs both at the academic department level and the Dean’s level. All departments have curriculum committees that are responsible for periodic and regular course/program/curriculum evaluation, which supports curriculum revision. Changes are reviewed first at the department level and then by the school- wide curriculum committee. Significant changes must also be approved by the Office of the Provost and, ultimately, CEPH. Major initiatives, such as launching a new learning modality such as distance education, or re-imagining the MPH core, typically originate in the Dean’s office. Such initiatives would receive input from departmental committees, and then go through the school-wide Curriculum Committee and Executive Advisory Committee before being sent to the Provost for review and approval.

Research and service expectations and policies: The academic department chairs, working with the Dean, establish expectations for research and service. The Chair counsels faculty members individually regarding the expectations for each one. Overall policies for faculty service and research are included in the department and school APT guidelines.

Some examples of ad hoc task forces include:

• As a result of the strategic planning retreat in July 2014, three education task forces were created; 1) undergraduate education; 2) accelerated MPH and 3) Methods courses. • For departmental Academic Program Reviews, each department created a taskforce during the process. • For the MPH core review, separate task forces were created for each of the major courses to review and revamp. The major outcome was combining two courses. • For CEPH, the School created a writing task force. • When we moved into the new building, the School had a “Next Day Committee”. • For planning in the new Science and Engineering Hall, the SEH building task force was created. • When the MPH@GW and MHA@GW programs were created and launched, we had ad hoc teams work on curriculum and program. • In response to emergent needs related to research issues, we developed: o SPH Conflict of Interest and Ethics Committee (Chaired by Dean Horn) o SPH Student IRB Liaison Working Group o SPH Global Research Task Force (led by Dean Horn) o SPH ORU Directors Committee (underway, led by Dean Horn)

In response to an uptick in student suicides/attempted suicides, the School led a University Mental Health Workgroup (working w/ leadership from Office of the Provost, Office of the President).

In response to the Ebola Crisis, a university-wide Ebola Work Group was created.

International Travel Protocol Work Group (GH faculty and staff with international experience coordinators from across the University).

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 64

1.5.c. A copy of the school’s bylaws or other policy documents that determine the rights and obligations of administrators, faculty and students in governance of the school.

The rights and responsibilities of faculty are covered under the GW Faculty Code: http://www.gwu.edu/~facsen/faculty_senate/pdf/2004Code.pdf

PH Bylaws: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/pdf/milken_faculty_bylaws.pdf

SPH Guidelines for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure are found here: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/pdf/milken_appointment_guidelines.pdf

Policies governing student rights and responsibilities can be found at:

SPH Student Handbook: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/pdf/Handbook.pdf

GW Code of Academic Integrity: https://studentconduct.gwu.edu/sites/studentconduct.gwu.edu/files/downloads/141003%20 Code%20of%20Academic%20Integrity%20-%20Final.pdf

GW Guide to Students Rights and Responsibilities: https://studentconduct.gwu.edu/sites/studentconduct.gwu.edu/files/downloads/Guid e%20to%20Student%20Rights%202011-2012%20-%20Final.pdf

1.5.d. Identification of school faculty who hold membership on university committees, through which faculty contribute to the activities of the university.

SPH faculty members are actively engaged in the university community and governance. As such, many are members of formal university committees. Many serve on informal ad hoc university committees. Below is a list of faculty who hold membership on the University Senate and its committees. Senators are elected by SPH Faculty; committee members are selected by the Senate.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 65

Table 1.5.d. SHP Representation on University Committees SPH REPRESENTATION ON UNIVERSITY COMMITTEES YEAR COMMITTEE NAME SPH FACULTY REPRESENTATIVE University Senate 2015-16 UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATE Karen McDonnell (PCH)(Senator, Executive Committee) Rebecca Katz (HPM) (Senator) Rajiv Rimal (PCH)(Senator) Lynn Goldman (Dean)(Administrative Member) 2015-16 UNIVERSITY SENATE Athletics and Recreation: COMMITTEES Mary Barron (EXNS) Beverly Westerman (EXNS)

Fiscal Planning and Budgeting: James Tielsch (GH)

Honors and Academic Convocations Leonard Friedman (HPM)

Professional Ethics and Academic Freedom James Cawley (PCH) Kurt Darr (HPM) Joel Teitelbaum (HPM) Amita Vyas (PCH)

Research Peter Shin (HPM)

Benefits Advisory Committee Brian Biles (HPM) Jane Thorpe (HPM)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 66

Table 1.5.d.: SPH REPRESENTATION ON UNIVERSITY COMMITTEES, (continued) Other University Committees 2015-16 Council of Deans Lynn Goldman (Dean) 2015-16 Council of Associate Deans Julie DeLoia (Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) 2015-16 Council of Undergraduate Deans Julie DeLoia (Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) 2015-16 Research Advisory Council Kimberly Horn (Associate Dean for Research) Robert Burke (HPM) Leighton Ku (HPM) Melissa Perry (EOH) Olga Price (PCH) 2015-16 Institutional Biosafety Committee Mimi Ghosh (Epi/Bio) Melissa Perry (EOH) 2015-16 GW HIPAA Compliance Melissa Goldstein (HPM) Committee 2015-16 IRB Melissa Goldstein (HPM) Larry Hamm (EXNS) Marsha Regenstein (HPM) Samuel Simmens (Epi/Bio)) 2015-16 President’s Advisory Council Lynn Goldman (Dean) 2015-16 President’s Benefits Task Force Sara Rosenbaum (HPM) 2015-16 Center for Student Engagement Melissa Napolitano (PCH) 2015-16 Graduate Enrollment Julie DeLoia (Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) Management Committee 2015-16 Biostatistics Center Executive Kathleen Jablonski (Epi/Bio) Committee Elizabeth Thom (Epi/Bio) Madeline Rice (Epi/Bio) 2015-16 Colonial Inauguration Beverly Westerman (EXNS) 2015-16 VALOR Julie DeLoia (Associate Dean for Academic Affairs)

1.5.e. Description of student roles in governance, including any formal student organizations.

See 1.5.a. for detailed information regarding student representation on Milken Institute SPH governance committees.

• Executive Advisory: President of SPH Public Health Student Association • Curriculum: one student selected by SPH Public Health Student Association, non-voting o DrPH student on DrPH subcommittee o Undergraduate student on the BS-Public Health subcommittee • Admissions: one student selected by SPH Public Health Student Association, non-voting • Research: two doctoral students (one for PhD programs, one for DrPH programs) elected by the doctoral students, non-voting

In AY2014/15, the Public Health Student Association was granted “umbrella” authority for the School. As a result, our student fees now come back to our student organizations. Under the PHSA we currently have four sanctioned organizations: Global Health Network, Black Public Health Student Network, Health Policy Student Association and Health Services Management and Leadership Student Association.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 67

A fifth organization, OUTREACH (Allied LGBT+) is currently in the process of being vetted. There is also a student liaison to all of the departments. These students attend monthly faculty meetings.

STUDENT-RUN ASSOCIATIONS:

Information about student organizations can be found at our website: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/services/students/student-organizations

• Public Health Student Association (PHSA): The official “umbrella” organization for the SPH students under the governance structure for the GW Student Association. PHSA has representatives from the other student associations as well as departmental representatives from programs that do not have their own associations. The PHSA organizes all efforts to elect student representatives to SPH committees at the school-wide, symposia and networking events. • Delta Omega: GW’s chapter of the national Public Health Honor Society • Black Public Health Student Network (BPHSN): A Chapter of the Black Young Professionals' Public Health Network, the GW BPHSN promotes networking activities and enhances awareness of African American health issues. • Epidemiology and Biostatistics Student Association: A private Linked-In group that connects current Epi-Bio Students and alumni. • Health Policy Student Association: A networking group that promotes panels, workshops, social events and mentorship opportunities among our Health Policy students. • Health Services Management and Leadership Student Association: Promotes student involvement, recognition, and representation in GW and the healthcare community, acts as a liaison between the MHA program and its students and increases increasing the interaction between the student body and leading healthcare players in Washington, D.C., and nearby. • Society of Exercise Science Students: Via Facebook, connects Exercise Science students for internships, networking, and professional and social interactions.

1.5.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • School administrators and faculty are actively engaged in university governance. • The School has inclusive governing bodies, with student representation throughout. • Governance documents are easily accessible to the School’s entire community. • SPH students are actively engaged and involved in School governance and in the development of their own independent initiatives.

Challenges: • None

Future Plans: • Potential addition of OUTREACH, as a formal student organization.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 68

1.6 FISCAL RESOURCES. THE SCHOOL SHALL HAVE FINANCIAL RESOURCES ADEQUATE TO FULFILL ITS STATED MISSION AND GOALS, AND ITS INSTRUCTIONAL, RESEARCH AND SERVICE OBJECTIVES.

1.6.a. Description of the budgetary and allocation processes, including all sources of funding supportive of the instruction, research and service activities. This description should include, as appropriate, discussion about legislative appropriations, formula for funds distribution, tuition generation and retention, gifts, grants and contracts, indirect cost recovery, taxes or levies imposed by the university or other entity within the university, and other policies that impact the fiscal resources available to the school.

The SPH is a closed unit of the George Washington University (GW) as described in 1.3.c. This means the SPH manages all revenue and is responsible for all expenses. The School is required to cover any deficits and may build reserves with surpluses. The School pays a negotiated set of levies to the University for services provided by central GW offices. The School is also responsible for facilities payments for physical plant assets and rental properties. Additionally, the SPH creates and monitors its own budget each fiscal year which runs from July 1 – June 30.

1. Revenue The SPH has several revenue streams including tuition and fees, indirect cost recovery, sponsored projects, pledges and gifts, fees for service, and endowment payout.

Tuition and Fees: • Undergraduate Tuition – The tuition revenue for the School’s undergraduates minus the Undergraduate Financial Aid Discount, which historically runs between 36% - 42%. The Discount is paid to and administered by the central Undergraduate Financial Aid office. • Graduate Tuition – Tuition revenue for the School’s graduate students. Scholarships are granted and administered by SPH and included in the revenue section. • Tuition Redistribution – GW reimburses any teaching school 80% of tuition revenue for all students from outside their home school. For undergraduates, the Undergraduate Financial Aid Discount is applied and reported with Revenue. Historically SPH nets a significant portion of overall tuition revenue from redistribution. • Distance Education – Tuition revenue from the School’s on-line programs require significant infrastructure support from 2U, Inc. (2U). • Application and Course Fees – These fees constitute an insignificant source of revenue for the school.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 69

Indirect Cost Recovery The SPH receives indirect cost recovery revenue from effort and other costs covered by sponsored projects. The amount of recovery on research projects funded by the Federal Government is tied to the rate allowed in the Colleges and Universities Rate Agreement negotiated by GW with the Department of Health and Human Services Division of Cost Allocation. The current agreement allows an indirect cost rate of 58.5% for On-Campus projects and a 26% rate for Off-Campus projects through 6/30/2015 and will be continued indefinitely after that period until amended.

The SPH has a mix of sponsors other than Federal Government agencies including foundations and other Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) that do not pay full indirect rates. Additionally, some Federal Government awards do not pay full indirect rate for a variety of reasons. There is also a mix between On-Campus and Off-Campus projects. For these projects in FY2014 the effective blended rate was 15.7%.

Sponsored Projects

The SPH has a portfolio of sponsored projects with federal government agencies, state and city governments, other educational institutions, foundations, NGO’s, and corporations. Each dollar of direct expense is recognized as a dollar of revenue. Direct expenses are incurred for salaries, fringe benefits, purchased services, sub-contracts, and other expense categories.

The Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) and the Grants and Contract Accounting Services (GCAS) jointly administer sponsored projects at GW. Revenue generated by each of the schools, including SPH, is credited to that school. Indirect Cost Recovery Funds (see above) collected on SPH awards are also credited to the School.

Pledges and Gifts The SPH solicits and accepts pledges and gifts for the benefit of the School. Pledges and gifts are either unrestricted, which allows the School to spend the proceeds as wished, or restricted, in which case the School must spend the proceeds in the manner set forth in the gift agreement.

Fees for Service

SPH generates a small amount of revenue annually from fees for service. This revenue is generally generated by faculty members who perform services in their role as faculty for another entity.

Endowment Payout

The University manages the endowments of all Schools centrally. The corpus of endowments that benefit the SPH are used to purchase units in the central endowment. Payouts are made on a per unit basis. In the last decade, payouts have averaged approximately 5% of the market value of the endowment.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 70

Payouts are drawn down either periodically (monthly) or in full at the end of the fiscal year. The School provides evidence to the central endowment department that the expenses being reimbursed fulfill the purpose of the endowment as set forth in the endowment agreement. No such documentation is required for unrestricted endowments.

2. Expenditures Expenditures are posted to the main GW general ledger accounting system (Oracle) from a variety of sources. Payroll dates, cost center distribution information, and other employee data are housed in the Banner system. Each pay period the appropriate charges are uploaded to the Oracle system and charged to the appropriate cost center.

Charges that are incurred through the use of a University-issued procurement card and personal credit cards (reimbursements) are input to the Concur system along with supporting documentation and are posted to the appropriate organizations and cost center after the proper reviews and approvals have been completed.

The University also has a simplified procurement system for office supplies, laboratory supplies, desk top computers, and other classes of products that it maintains. Departments initiate requests for baskets of products from vendors that are in the system. The orders are sent electronically through an approval chain and transmitted to the vendor. The organization and account to be charged are assigned at the time of initiation.

Sub-contracts and large procurements generally must be documented by a written agreement that sets forth the responsibilities of the parties. The agreements are reviewed by the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) who may modify them as necessary to properly follow the policies and procedures of the University. The OGC reviewer determines the approval process for each agreement, which may include the Dean, the Executive Vice President and Treasurer, and the Provost. Invoices need to be supported by and consistent with the agreement.

There are additional company-specific uploads for paying companies such as Federal Express, UPS, and utility companies.

Expenditures for services provided by other University departments that are not part of the regular allocation process described below are charged to an expense account through either a Service Level Agreement (SLA) or journal entries. Conversely if SPH provides a service to another University school or department, it is credited to an expense account through a journal entry (as opposed to a revenue account). SLA’s and journal entries require the approval of all parties.

3. Organization Structure The SPH has two distinct types of departments to serve its needs; academic departments and infrastructure departments.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 71

Academic Departments

SPH’s six academic departments each have a unique identifier in the accounting system that includes the organization number and the fund type. The main fund type for each department is called the C-Fund. The following example is of a unique identifier ** 872511-C100001 ** where 872511 represents the Department of Global Health and C100001 represents their C-Fund. The C-Fund generally holds the main budget for the department and is closed out at the end of each fiscal year. The department may have an additional C-Fund if it has an Institute or Center related to it.

The departments also have an R-Fund, which in essence serves as a savings account for the departments. These balances rollover from fiscal year to fiscal year. The money in the R-Funds come from several different sources, including the Dean’s Office, outside payments for services, transfers from other departments or schools, and residual transfers for fixed price sponsored projects that were not spent out. There may also be additional R-Funds funded by internal or external sources to perform a specific project. These funds may be assigned to a departmental organization or to a Dean’s Office organization (infrastructure).

Infrastructure Organizations

Infrastructure Organizations are generally within the Dean’s Office. These organizations have a C-Fund that holds the budget for their current operations. As is the case with departments (and their C-Funds), they close out at the end of each fiscal year.

There are several program groups, such as the Doctoral Programs, Undergraduate Education and the online programs, which require resources across both the academic and infrastructure departments and therefore have their own C-Funds in order to properly assign the appropriate expenses.

Infrastructure organizations may also have R-Funds funded by internal or external sources to perform a specific project or for holding current gifts whether restricted or unrestricted.

4. Budget Process The School budgets on an annual basis. The fiscal year begins on July 1 and ends on June 30 of each year. The budget process starts in December of the previous fiscal year. Instructions are given to department chairs and administrative managers relating to budget priorities and formats.

All department chairs, administrative managers, and deans present their draft budgets for the next year at a budget hearing held in January. They are asked to highlight requests for additional resources and also cost savings relative to the current year’s budget.

The Dean convenes a group to review the draft proposals and makes resource allotment decisions based on expected revenues and other incoming resources. The departments are notified of the results of the review in February.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 72

The administrative managers supervise the input of the budget review into the GW budget tool, McBud, which is an Access database maintained by the Comptroller’s Office. After the budget has been entered, the Finance Director balances revenue and expenses to ensure the school’s resources are neither under or over pledged. Invariably there need to be adjustments that often include changes in some department’s resources. Meetings are held to communicate cuts or add-ons as necessary.

After the budget is balanced, finalized, and approved by the Dean, the McBud file is used by the Comptroller’s and Budget Office for presentation to the Board of Trustees. After final approval by the Board of Trustees, the file is uploaded to the Oracle General Ledger.

Changes are expected in a number of these processes in planning for AY2017. Because the GW Board of Trustees is now requesting that budgets be developed earlier in the cycle, the SPH process will begin 3 months earlier. Additionally, GW is transitioning to the use of a new budgeting tool to replace McBud.

5. Allocations The School receives many services from other entities at the George Washington University. These services are generally governed by a written agreement. Recurring journal entries are prepared that charge the school on a monthly basis.

The following services are provided by other entities within the University:

• Research Administration (OVPR and GCAS) • Himmelfarb Library (cost is shared with the School of Medicine and the School of Nursing) • Central University Services (all services not separately negotiated) • Division of Information Technology • Housekeeping • Police Department • Wet Laboratory Occupancy (School of Medicine) • Off-Site Leases (Office of the Executive Vice President and Treasurer) • Academic Technologies

These agreements are negotiated on an annual basis.

1.6.b. A clearly formulated school budget statement, showing sources of all available funds and expenditures by major categories. This information must be presented in a table format appropriate to the school. See Template 1.6.1.

The major sources of revenue for the School include tuition and fees, research, and philanthropy. Over the past three years all of these categories of revenue have grown significantly. Tuition revenue has been bolstered by the launch of two online/hybrid programs; the MPH@GW and the MHA@GW. Hiring an Associate Dean for Research has enabled faculty and staff development, as well as support systems for submitting and tracking grants. Finally, with the separation of the School from the Medical Center,

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 73 the School was able to build its own development staff, focused on fund raising specifically for the School.

Major categories of expenditures include support to the central University functions, faculty and staff salaries, building operations, contract obligations and student scholarship/aid.

This CEPH Data Template below is also available in ERF 1.6.1.: CEPH Data Template 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 74

Template 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category, Fiscal Year 2010 (7/1/09 - 6/30/10) to Fiscal Year 2014 (7/1/13 - 6/30/14)

Source of Funds FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Tuition & Fees 30,624,617 32,547,223 34,658,163 35,349,364 38,991,730 State Appropriation - - - - - University Funds - - - - - Grants/Contracts 74,497,620 63,432,984 64,923,309 71,216,161 95,603,177 Indirect Cost Recovery1 3,767,348 4,079,423 4,600,120 4,826,520 5,264,656 Endowment 600,703 727,186 709,258 733,420 1,195,242 Gifts 166,693 259,241 172,854 307,776 427,086 Other - Various Funding for Meetings, Conferences, and 339,642 1,220,766 999,389 1,162,130 867,093

Total: 109,996,623 102,266,823 106,063,093 113,595,371 142,348,984

Expenditures FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Faculty Salary & Benefits 10,710,357 11,341,390 14,298,835 16,937,040 18,343,503 Staff Salaries & Benefits 3,033,444 3,131,168 4,557,142 6,720,592 8,050,783 Operations2 4,624,507 4,002,515 4,704,413 6,353,255 9,852,699 Travel 655,009 647,636 576,171 793,023 609,045 Student Support 5,936,918 6,080,075 6,974,332 7,439,473 7,772,486 University Tax3 11,678,610 12,966,067 8,566,789 6,737,747 7,488,570 University Central Services $795,679 $800,313 $1,019,252 $1,049,830 $1,081,325 Occupancy Costs - Ross Hall $975,853 $684,450 $352,357 $126,783 $146,424 Indirect Cost Recovery $3,774,848 $4,079,423 $0 $0 $0 University Margin $319,110 $1,328,218 $0 $0 $0 Himmelfarb Library $3,139,085 $3,290,469 $3,269,016 $3,269,807 $3,495,143 Other Medical Center Services $2,674,035 $2,783,194 $2,334,408 $491,327 $540,849 Research Administration $0 $0 $1,591,756 $1,800,000 $2,224,829 Other - Support and Investment4 (1,139,843) 664,989 1,462,103 (2,601,920) (5,371,279) Other - Research Expenditures 74,497,620 63,432,984 64,923,309 71,216,161 95,603,177

Total: 109,996,622 102,266,824 106,063,094 113,595,371 142,348,984

1 In FY2010 and FY2011 the school did not have control over the Indirect Cost Recovery Revenue and did not derive significant benefit so it is being classified as a University Tax. 2Operations includes: purchase services, indepartmental assessments, equipment & supplies, occupancy, communications, etc. 3 FY2010 Himmelfarb Library and Other Medical Center Services are estimates but the total equals the overall Medical Center allocation. 4See Support & Investment Schedule in Criteria 1.6.d.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 75

1.6.c. If the school is a collaborative one sponsored by two or more universities, the budget statement must make clear the financial contributions of each sponsoring university to the overall school budget.

Not Applicable.

1.6.d. Identification of measurable objectives by which the school assesses the adequacy of its fiscal resources, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years.

The departments in the school are largely responsible for admissions and teaching which makes their annual departmental budget request a critical element in achieving resource adequacy. In addition to assessing the correct amount of full time faculty necessary to teach, they must also quantify the level of research effort expected from full -time faculty, the amount of administrative support for teaching, research, and service, the need for adjunct faculty, and the amount of student assistance required. During the course of the budget process, the school administration reviews the department’s submission and negotiates the final budgets for each.

As part of the performance review process the school holds quarterly reviews to assess the performance of each department in relation to its budget. The departments may be required to fund overages from the department R-Fund at the discretion of the Dean.

The budget and performance of the non-academic departments are regularly monitored by the Finance Director. Overages are flagged and the appropriate director or manager provides justifications to the Finance Office. Any consequences are implemented at the discretion of the Dean.

The overall budget is the most significant monitoring tool for the school. The Finance Office provides quarterly forecasts based on actual revenues and expenses. These forecasts are submitted to the University Office of the Vice President and Treasurer to be rolled into an overall University forecast that is presented to the Board of Trustees.

The most significant single metric for the school going forward is the reserve balance of funds not committed to capital projects. The following chart shows this balance for the last five years.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 76

Table 1.6.d.1: Support and Investment

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Other Entity Transfer In/(Out) $83,559 ($158,673) ($13,515) $286,155 $273,275 Grant Residual Transfers $238,504 $567,278 $325,406 $250,447 $486,695 Reserve Transfer In/(Out) $817,780 ($1,000,000) ($1,675,209) $2,065,318 $4,611,310 Misc. Transfers In/(Out) $0 ($73,594) ($98,785) $0 $0

Total $1,139,843 ($664,989) ($1,462,103) $2,601,920 $5,371,279

Reserve Analysis FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Opening Balance $5,865,407 $5,047,627 $6,047,627 $7,722,836 $5,657,518 Operations In/(Out) ($817,780) $1,000,000 $1,675,209 ($2,065,318) ($4,611,310) Gifts $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,448,572 Misc Transfers In/(Out) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

End Balance $5,047,627 $6,047,627 $7,722,836 $5,657,518 $6,494,780

The Reserve increases and decreases are based on results of operations. Reserves are used when there is a deficit, and conversely when there is a surplus, those funds are added to reserves. Additionally large gifts are kept in Reserves. (For example part of the Milken gift hit in FY2014 and appears under ‘gifts’.)

Additional metrics that the school uses to assess resources include:

• Faculty productivity (Research Attainment) • Research staff productivity (Research Attainment) • Student to Faculty FTE ratio • Research revenue attainment • Indirect Cost Recovery revenue attainment • Development Attainment • Admission Goals by department

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 77

Table 1.6.d.2.: Outcome Measures for Fiscal Resource Adequacy Outcome Measure Target AY2012/13 AY2013/14 AY2014/15 Percent of expenditures derived 50% 48% 50% 52% from grants and contracts

Percent of tuition revenue provided as scholarship support 9% 5.7% 6.3% 9.2% from operating funds.

Average percent of faculty salary coverage through funded 40% NA* 39.2% 38.3% projects.

Indirect cost recovery. $5.5M $4,600,120 $4,820,334 $5,264,656

* This report is not available for AY2012/13.

1.6.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Financial results are more readily available than results related to “per student” type metrics. • The school has autonomy in developing new initiatives, which provides more agility. • Quick identification of underperformance on admission goals. • Quick identification of underperformance on research goals. • Flexibility to repurpose resources.

Weaknesses: • Because the GW accounting system is separate from the admissions and payroll system there can be difficulty developing new metrics to meet new needs. • The school needs to develop more advanced metrics in order to identify potential financial weaknesses as early as possible.

Future plans:

• A new budget tool is being purchased during the next fiscal year, according to current scheduling. It will allow a dramatic improvement in the ability to access data from the accounting system. • Various Dashboards by position (e.g. Finance Director, Dean, etc.) are currently being tested and are expected to be fully operational over the next fiscal year.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 78

1.7 FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES. THE SCHOOL SHALL HAVE PERSONNEL AND OTHER RESOURCES ADEQUATE TO FULFILL ITS STATED MISSION AND GOALS, AND ITS INSTRUCTIONAL, RESEARCH AND SERVICE OBJECTIVES.

1.7.a A concise statement or chart defining the number (headcount) of primary faculty in each of the five core public health knowledge areas employed by the school for each of the last three years. If the school is a collaborative one, sponsored by two or more institutions, the statement or chart must include the number of faculty from each of the participating institutions. See CEPH Data Template 1.7.1.

Table 1.7.a- CEPH Data Template 1.7.1 Primary Faculty by Core Knowledge Area Department AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 AY 2015-16 EOH 11 11 12 Epi/Bio 30 30 31 EXNS 10 11 13 GH 17 18 17 HP 38 N/A N/A HSML 8 N/A N/A HPM1 N/A 45 38 PCH 25 23 24 TOTAL 139 138 135 1The Departments of Health Policy (HP) and Health Services Management & Leadership (HSML) merged into one department called Health Policy Management (HPM) in AY 2014-15. N/A indicates no data available during these periods before, and then after, the merger. Does not include one LOA in EOH Department.

1.7.b. A table delineating the number of faculty, students and SFRs, organized by department or specialty area, or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school, for each of the last three years (calendar years or academic years) prior to the site visit. Data must be presented in a table format (see CEPH Data Template 1.7.2).

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 79

CEPH Data Template 1.7.2 Student Faculty Ratios by Department Fall 2015 HC FTE SFR by SFR by Primary Primary HC Other FTE Other HC Total FTE Total HC FTE Primary Total Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Students Students Faculty FTE Faculty FTE EOH 12 11.1 10 0.3 22 11.4 59 41.3 3.7 3.6 Epi/Bio 31 30.5 15 0.9 46 31.4 166 140.7 4.6 4.5 EXNS 13 12.8 47 8.9 60 21.7 182 171.3 13.4 7.9 GH 17 14.3 9 0.7 26 15.0 113 70.3 4.9 4.7 HPM 38 34.0 47 6.3 85 40.2 331 237.5 7.0 5.9 PCH 24 23.2 35 2.6 59 25.8 169 135.3 5.8 5.3 MPH@GW 22 14.9 84 16.7 106 31.6 702 421.9 28.3 13.4 BS, PH 9 2.7 4 0.8 13 3.4 61 61.0 23.0 17.9 SPH TOTALS 135 125.8 163 19.6 298 145.5 1783 1279.3 10.2 8.8 Data collected from 2015 fall faculty data and 2015 fall student census. Does not include faculty on LOA. One additional student (.33 FTE) can be counted toward total student headcount (1784)- a Certificate in PH student who does not fit into any specific department.

Fall 2014 HC FTE SFR by SFR by Primary Primary HC Other FTE Other HC Total FTE Total HC FTE Primary Total Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Students Students Faculty FTE Faculty FTE EOH 11 10.1 16 1.2 27 11.3 61 46.1 4.6 4.1 Epi/Bio 30 30.0 20 1.6 50 31.6 179 135.9 4.5 4.3 EXNS 11 11.0 42 7.9 53 18.9 181 169.7 15.4 9.0 GH 18 13.9 10 1.6 28 15.5 117 83.1 6.0 5.4 HPM* 45 40.0 16 4.2 61 44.1 258 196.7 4.9 4.5 PCH 23 20.6 24 2.0 47 22.5 165 130.9 6.4 5.8 MPH@GW 18 14.6 52 10.5 70 25.1 399 240.9 16.5 9.6 BS, PH 8 2.4 4 0.9 12 3.3 68 67.4 28.7 20.7 SPH TOTALS 138 125.5 128 18.3 266 143.9 1428 1070.7 8.5 7.4 Data collected from 2014 fall faculty data and 2014 fall student census. Does not include faculty on LOA.

Fall 2013 HC FTE SFR by SFR by Primary Primary HC Other FTE Other HC Total FTE Total HC FTE Primary Total Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Students Students Faculty FTE Faculty FTE EOH 11 11.0 7 0.5 18 11.5 61 41.6 3.8 3.6 Epi/Bio 30 30.1 7 0.7 37 30.8 180 137.8 4.6 4.5 EXNS 10 10.0 45 8.5 55 18.5 175 166.6 16.7 9.0 GH 17 15.0 4 0.5 21 15.5 150 107.4 7.2 6.9 HPM 38 33.1 15 4.0 53 37.1 145 106.1 3.2 2.9 HSML 8 6.8 3 0.7 11 7.5 85 67.4 9.9 9.0 PCH 25 23.4 15 2.3 40 25.7 193 157.8 6.7 6.1 MPH@GW 11 6.8 15 1.8 26 8.5 107 67.4 10.0 7.9 BS, PH 8 2.4 6 1.2 14 3.6 60 60.0 25.5 16.9 SPH TOTALS 139 129.4 96 17.1 235 146.5 1156 912.2 7.0 6.2 Data collected from 2013 fall faculty data and 2013 fall student census. Does not include Faculty on LOA.

NOTE: The MPH@GW and BS, PH faculty headcount and FTE's are NOT included in the SPH Totals because these faculty are appointed to specific departments and therefore are already counted in the department totals. The purpose of showing MPHW@GW and BS, PH as separate line items is to account specifically for the Student Faculty Ratio for these distinct programs.

* 2014-15: Departments of Health Policy and Health Services Management & Leadership have merged to Health Policy & Management

LEGEND: HC= Headcount FTE= Full time Equivalent SFR = Student/Faculty Ratio LOA = Leave of Absence

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 80

1.7.c. A concise statement or chart defining the headcount and FTE of non-faculty, non-student personnel (administration and staff).

The SPH has 187 staff members, with over 52% employed in research or research support functions within the individual units.

Table 1.7.c Staff Headcount HEADCOUNT FTE UNIT Research Other Research Other EOH 6 6 6.0 6.0 EPI/BIO 23 7 22.2 6.8 EXNS 2 4 1.5 4.0 GH 2 4 2.0 3.5 HPM 34 15 33.5 15.0 PCH 17 11 16.7 10.9 Dean’s Office/Operations1 Communications/Marketing 0 7 0 7.0 Development 0 1 0 1.0 Operations/Dean’s Office 0 12 0 12.0 Admissions/Student Affairs 0 13 0 12.6 Technology 0 6 0 6.0 Research 0 4 0 4.0 Distance Education 0 4 0 4.0 OVERALL TOTAL 84 94 81.9 92.8 Data from GW Human Resources Information System (HRIS) as of September 2015. 1Seven units shown here roll up to Dean’s Office/Operations

1.7.d. Description of the space available to the school for various purposes (offices, classrooms, common space for student use, etc.), by location.

The SPH currently operates in three locations on the Foggy Bottom campus and on the GW Ashburn campus in Virginia. The majority of the faculty and staff and the teaching and study spaces are located at the main building at 950 New Hampshire Ave. Additionally, almost 100 faculty, staff and research personnel are located at 2175 K Street, 200 steps from the main building. In addition there are four wet laboratories located on 23rd Street at Ross Hall in the Medical School (also close to the main building). Further afield, there is an exercise science laboratory at the GW Virginia campus in Ashburn, Virginia. We are in the final planning stages to build out 30,818 feet2 of wet laboratory, research, teaching and office space in the new GW Science and Engineering Hall located at 22nd and I street. Occupancy is planned for late July 2016.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 81

The School of Public Health Building The SPH had a unique opportunity to create a building that would embody our values in the heart of Washington DC. The overall plan was to create a physical environment that would embody our commitment to inclusion throughout all eight floors of the new 115,000 feet2 building. The building offers technologically advanced classrooms, laboratories for the EXNS department, athletic and yoga studios, offices, study areas, four auditoriums and a state of the art convening center, all designed with healthy and environmentally sustainable features throughout. Faculty and staff began occupancy in the spring of 2014, with classes in the new building beginning in the 2014 summer semester.

Within the building, there are 8,200 feet2 dedicated to classrooms and interactive learning, with another 10,500 feet2 dedicated to auditoriums for more lecture-style classes. The convening center can be partitioned into four distinct rooms with full audio visual technology capability. These can be used for educational purposes or as locations for health conferences for external public health audiences and community civic activities.

The building has 122 offices, 148 cubicle work stations, six conference rooms, 18 classrooms ranging in size from 20 to 50 student capacity. The main auditorium on the first floor holds 220 people while two on the lower floor have 97 and 102 seat capacity. The seventh floor is the location of the fourth large executive case-study room seating 75.

Furniture in the classrooms is conducive to interactive learning, with movable chairs and easy-to-use AV technology, providing an inspiring learning and teaching environment for students and faculty alike.

Opportunities for collaboration among students and faculty are evident throughout the building, highlighted by the student lounges with flexible furniture and white boards on every floor. Included in the building are:

• automated wheel chair accessible bathrooms and office suites on two floors; • a transgender bathroom; • a mother’s room with a refrigerator; • an abundance of private and public spaces for students to work together or individually, meditate or pray; • kitchens for students on three separate floors, with refrigerators and microwaves so that students have the option of bringing, storing and preparing their own food. The school also has vending machines that only sell healthy food and snacks, the first of their kind on the campus and already popular with students as well as faculty and staff and; • Over 400 lockers for students to have space to use each semester to keep personal items/ classroom supplies.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 82

2175 K Street: The SPH occupies 7,644 feet2 on the second floor and 12,056 feet2 on the fifth floor. The second floor houses the School’s development, communications, project management, events and IT staff, in addition to eight research staff dedicated to the Prevention and Community Health Program. The fifth floor houses Health Policy and Management faculty and research staff.

Ross Hall in the GW Medical School: The Milken Institute currently operates four wet laboratories under a shared service agreement with the medical school. These laboratories are approximately 4,000 feet2 and are described in Criteria 1.7.e.

Virginia Science & Technology Campus: The Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences houses a physiology laboratory at the Virginia Campus in Ashburn.

GW Science and Engineering Hall:

In July 2016, the School will occupy the 7th floor of the new Science and Engineering Hall. This 30,818 feet2 space will include 15,260 feet2 research laboratory space, a 3,002 feet2 public health teaching laboratory, 26 private offices, 90 open workstations, 3 conference rooms, a 1,422 feet2 BSL-level 3 laboratory and common space.

For more information, see ERF 1.7.d. Additional Facilities Information and Science and Engineering Hall.

1.7.e. A concise description of the laboratory space, and description of the kind, quantity and special features or special equipment

The SPH now occupies significant state-of-the-art laboratory space for the following groups and more is under construction:

950 New Hampshire Avenue Building (Foggy Bottom)-Department of Exercise & Nutrition Sciences (3,159 total feet2): • Exercise Physiology Teaching Laboratory (400 feet2) • Exercise Physiology & Metabolism Laboratory (441 feet2 ) • Exercise & Nutritional Biochemistry Laboratory (310 feet2) • Anatomy & Physiology (A&P) Teaching Laboratory (491 feet2) • Prevention, Assessment, Care & Treatment Laboratory (657 feet2) • Body Composition Laboratory (354 feet2 ) • Exercise & Nutrition Sciences Laboratory (506 feet2 )

Additionally, two large exercise rooms (1,375 & 1,079 feet2) and a yoga studio (639 feet2) are on the basement level of our main building.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 83

Ross Hall (Foggy Bottom) (~4,000 total feet2): • Department of Environmental & Occupational Health: Environmental Health- Laboratory & office space -M. Perry (794 feet2) • Department of Environmental & Occupational Health: Antibiotic Resistance Action Center- L. Price (700 feet2) • Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics: Public Health Immunology-Laboratory- M. Ghosh (472 feet2) • Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics: Public Health Microbiology-Laboratory & equipment room-J. Jordan (1,820 feet2)

VSTC (Ashburn, Virginia): • GW Weight Management and Human Performance Laboratory (3,000 feet2)

Science and Engineering Hall (SEH)- 7th floor-Occupancy scheduled for June 2016 (all Ross Hall Laboratories will move to this new space): • Research and Laboratory support (15,260 feet2) • Teaching and Laboratory support-(3,002 feet2) • Private offices- 26 (3,156 feet2) • Open workstations- 90 (3,269 feet2) • Common space (meeting and break areas)

For details on space planned in the Science & Engineering Hall, see ERF: 1.7.e.: Science & Engineering Hall

Complete information about the SPH laboratory space is included in the ERF 1.7.e.: Laboratory Space.

1.7.f. A concise statement concerning the amount, location and types of computer facilities and resources for students, faculty, administration, and staff.

The GW Division of Information Technology provides computing, information, and network services to the entire campus community. A campus-wide network for data, voice, and video communication provides phones, data, and video connectivity for students, faculty, and staff. The University also provides many services for faculty, staff, and students, such as cloud-based email, calendaring, and document management from Google and Microsoft, and wireless network access covering nearly 100 percent of all George Washington University’s campus locations. In addition, the GW Academic Technologies Division oversees the conference rooms and classroom technologies in Milken Institute SPH Building in conjunction with support from the SPH Information Technology Department. The rooms are equipped with AV systems that include a computer, projector/digital displays and sound systems. There is also access to a lecture capture system and Blackboard. There are several computing laboratory spaces that are available to students both in the GW Himmelfarb library and in the Milken Institute SPH building

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 84 itself. Licensed software freely available to faculty, students and staff through George Washington University includes: Microsoft Office 2010, Adobe Acrobat, EndNote, SPSS, and Symantec Endpoint Protection anti-virus software.

Every full-time faculty, administration and clerical staff member has a University computer personally assigned to him or her, which is routinely upgraded with current technology. Each unit is maintained by The Milken Institute School of Public Health IT staff. Faculty members have the option of selecting the type of computer (laptop or desktop) and features best suited to their teaching, administrative and research needs.

The SPH has established a state-of-the-art infrastructure to fulfill the research needs of our faculty, research staff and their students as it relates to high-speed data analysis, data storage, and collaborative data sharing. This service is customized for SPH researchers and provides a comprehensive suite of analytical software applications and a secure centrally managed, cloud-based data storage service. Researchers, including graduate students and post-doctoral fellows, may use the system to (a) store and preserve their research data for future research and “training” sets for students; (b) work with both small and large-scale research datasets, and (c) collaborate more effectively on research with colleagues and students across departments and other schools.

For research needs that use high-performance computing for data analysis, there is a shared high- performance computing cluster named Colonial One, which is implemented and managed by professional staff in the Research Services Group within the GW Division of Information Technology, Colonial One is housed in the GW's enterprise-class datacenter that is located on the Virginia Science and Technology Campus. The datacenter features professional IT management by GW’s central Division of IT, including 24-hour on-premise and remote environment monitoring with hourly staff walk-throughs; redundant power distribution including UPS (battery) and generator backup; redundant cooling systems utilizing a dedicated chilled water plant and a glycol refrigeration system; and direct network connectivity to GW’s robust 100 Gigabit fiber optic network.

1.7.g. A concise description of library/information resources available for school use, including a description of library capacity to provide digital (electronic) content, access mechanisms, training opportunities and document-delivery services.

Collections The George Washington University’s extensive library collections are housed in the Melvin Gelman Library, the general academic library (http://library.gwu.edu/), the Jacob Burns Law Library (http://www.law.gwu.edu/Library/Pages/Default.aspx), the Paul Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library (http://himmelfarb.gwu.edu/), the Eckles Memorial Library on the Mount Vernon campus (http://library.gwu.edu/eckles), and the Virginia Science and Technology Campus Library (https://virginia.gwu.edu/library). These collections contain over 2 million volumes and over 20,000 serials and provide an extensive collection of general and specific volumes, periodicals, and papers in

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 85 health services administration, health policy, business, medical care, economics, operations research, law, human resources management, statistics, and basic sciences. All are important to the SPH and are readily accessible to students and faculty.

The Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library, the primary library for the SPH, is located in Ross Hall, one block from the school’s new building, and also serves the School of Medicine and Health Sciences and School of Nursing. The Library currently provides electronic access to over 3,031 textbooks, 3,926 journals, and 100 major databases. Himmelfarb provides extensive on-site access to online, print and audiovisual collections, as well as access to computers and study areas. The Library's print collections include approximately 100,000 volumes, selected print journals for browsing, and access to extensive journal back files. Over the past two years, monographic holdings in public health subject areas were extensively reviewed and expanded. The Library’s audiovisual collections include more than 400 current DVD and CD titles as well as applications software for word processing, publishing, spreadsheets, databases, and reference management and dozens of specialized software titles focused on medicine, the health sciences, public health, and statistical analysis. Key health sciences databases include MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Global Health, and Health Policy Reference Center. Students also have access to major interdisciplinary databases such as Business Source Complete, ABI/Inform Complete, and Academic Search Premier. The library provides electronic journals directly from publishers or through a vendor such as ABI/Inform, Clinical Key, Ovid, or LexisNexis. The full-text of electronic journals can be accessed from the library catalog, the e-journals page (http://ck8gh5qu6z.search.serialssolutions.com/), and via links within databases. The library uses the Libguides system to organize subject- and class-specific resources for students (http://libguides.gwumc.edu/guides ). There are 92 subject guides available for public health areas of focus such as health leadership and management, health information technology, epidemiology, health statistics, long-term care, health care quality, health policy, and health economics. General study guides on topics such as citation styles and reference management are also available. The Himmelfarb librarians schedule periodic events to orient students and faculty to their resources and services.

The entire Himmelfarb collection can be searched using a web-friendly online catalog: (http://catalog.himmelfarb.gwu.edu/iii/encore/;jsessionid=85DC7B0167E482E38E091A0C59125359?lang =eng). All electronic resources are accessible through the Library’s home page at himmelfarb.gwu.edu from both on and off-campus through secure links. Faculty members are regularly surveyed for input on the collection-- most recently in spring 2013. There are also radio buttons entitled, Request Library Purchase, throughout the library’s web page seeking patron input. A number of key resources are also available for mobile devices and can be downloaded through “the App Shelf” at http://himmelfarb.gwu.edu/apps/.

Off-campus access to electronic resources is available for all students and faculty members in one of three ways: 1) GW Virtual Private Network (VPN). The VPN is available to anyone with a login and password for the University e-mail system. It is maintained by the University’s Division of Information Technology. 2) WRLC Library Services gateway—the proxy service provided by the Washington Area

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 86

Research Library consortium to its nine members. Faculty, staff and students access this service using their GWID number (a unique University identification number). 3) EZ Proxy—a subscription proxy service with passwords created by the Library. This last service is used primarily for faculty members with appointments who have not yet been fully processed by the University for access through the VPN or WRLC Library Services. All 3 systems have proved reliable and provide a certain amount of needed redundancy. Directions and tutorials for using these systems are available on the Library’s web page.

For additional information about the General Library Services, Computing Support and Access to Services Beyond the Library see ERF 1.7.g.: Library Resources.

1.7.h. A concise statement of any other resources not mentioned above, if applicable

Biostatistics Center: http://www.bsc.gwu.edu/bsc/index.php Note: The Center, currently under OVPR, houses SPH faculty and is in transition to move administratively to the SPH. Most faculty are members of Milken Institute SPH Epi/Bio; grants are through the SPH. University Student Affairs: http://students.gwu.edu/gw-student-affairs-departments Includes University Center for Career Services, University Counseling Center, Student Health Services, International Services Office, etc. University Writing Center: http://students.gwu.edu/career-services Compliance Training and Skillport Online Learning: http://ode.hr.gwu.edu/online-learning Disability Support Services- http://disabilitysupport.gwu.edu/ University Human Resources: http://hr.gwu.edu/ SPH Resources for Faculty: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/services/faculty

1.7.i. Identification of measurable objectives through which the school assesses the adequacy of its resources, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 87

Table 1.7.i.: Assessment of Faculty and Other Resource Adequacy Outcome Measure Target AY2013/14 AY2014/15 AY2015/16 Student to faculty 7.0 SFR (primary 8.5 SFR (primary 10.2 SFR (primary ratio <10 faculty) faculty) faculty) 6.2 SFR (total 7.4 SFR (total 8.8 SFR (total faculty) faculty) faculty) Percent of undergraduate Classroom – 67% 94% Data not yet students satisfied or 90% 58% 95% available very satisfied with Laboratory – space 90%

Available Classroom space (% utilization 70% N/A (no building) 40% 43% for fall term) Percent of undergraduate 90% 88% 89% Data not yet students who are available* satisfied or very satisfied with library services Percent of undergraduates 90% 86% 81% Data not yet satisfied or very available* satisfied with career counseling services Percent of graduate students satisfied or 80% 60% 58% Data not yet very satisfied with available* career counseling services Percent of graduate students who use 80% 54% 64% Data not yet career counseling available* services * This data is generally available late November – early December.

1.7.j. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 88

Strengths: • Growth in faculty numbers and expertise. • Occupy own building for the first time ever. • Student:Faculty ratio supports high level of engaged learning.

Challenges: • Growth in School still necessitates a few additional locations, even after opening the new building.

Future Plans: • Develop and complete build-out of laboratories and offices in the Science and Engineering Hall.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 89

1.8 DIVERSITY. THE SCHOOL SHALL DEMONSTRATE A COMMITMENT TO DIVERSITY AND SHALL EVIDENCE AN ONGOING PRACTICE OF CULTURAL COMPETENCE IN LEARNING, RESEARCH AND SERVICE PRACTICES.

1.8.a. A written plan and/or policies demonstrating systematic incorporation of diversity within the school. Required elements include the following: i. Description of the school’s under-represented populations, including a rationale for the designation.

The School follows the NIH guidelines regarding under-represented populations (URP), as well as those of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Racial/ethnic categories we track include American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic/Latino origin, African American/Black, Asian, and White. Except for “white,” we consider all of these groups to be under-represented. These designations were chosen to help support applications for external funding and for ease of comparing how we are doing relative to other schools of public health and within our geographic area. We would like to track and support student diversity regarding socioeconomic background. However, to date, this has not been feasible since the School itself has not processed financial aid applications. We are seeking to obtain this information now that we have financial aid staff within the School. To help inform our diversity targets, we consider data from other Schools of Public Health and U.S. Census data for our region.

In comparison to other schools of public health, SPH has a lower than average representation for students and faculty of Hispanic origin. The percent of faculty of Asian origin is lower than other schools of public health, but higher than national and regional census data. The School’s representation of African American students, faculty and staff all exceed the averages compared to other schools of public health. Representation of African Americans holding staff positions is lower than the regional level percentages, and as such, is an area of focus for us.

In addition to the above categories, we also track military status of students. GW wishes to be at the forefront of support for active and retired military. Both the University and School are proud sponsors of the Yellow Ribbon Program. In addition, the University has an Office of Military and Veteran Student Services (http://services.military.gwu.edu/), under the recently created (April 2013) position of Associate Provost for Military and Veterans Affairs (held by Vice Admiral [ret.] Melvin Williams, Jr). Since Admiral Williams’ arrival, the University has bolstered its commitment to military and veterans, and as a consequence, we have been able to recruit more students with military backgrounds.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 90

Table: 1.8.a.i.: Military status of enrolled students in the SPH (fall census)

Military Status 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Veteran 3 5 12 37 Active 0 1 9 34 Reserve 1 5 4 4 National Guard 0 2 3 2 Dependent 0 4 4 12 TOTAL 4 (<1%) 17 (1.47%) 32 (2.24%) 89 (5.0%)

ii. A list of goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence within the school, and a description of how diversity-related goals are consistent with the university’s mission, strategic plan and other initiatives on diversity, as applicable.

The goal the University is to foster an environment in which all members of the GW community are treated equitably, contribute fully to the university's mission, and embrace and demonstrate GW values. Below are definitions we use, which were provided by the President's Council on Diversity and Inclusion: https://diversity.gwu.edu/.

Diversity: The term diversity is used to describe individual differences (e.g. life experiences, learning and working styles, personality types) and group/social differences (e.g. race, socio-economic status, class, gender, sexual orientation, country of origin, ability, intellectual traditions and perspectives, as well as cultural, political, religious, and other affiliations) that can be engaged to achieve excellence in teaching, learning, research, scholarship, and administrative and support services.

Inclusion: The term inclusion is used to describe the active, intentional, and ongoing engagement with diversity -- in people, in the curriculum, in the co-curriculum, and in communities (e.g. intellectual, social, cultural, geographic) with which individuals might connect.

The SPH has been a leader in promoting diversity on the campus. The School has set diversity objectives for faculty, staff and students. Of the current faculty body, over 20% self-identified as belonging to a minority group. In the tenure track, just over 19% of our faculty identify as minority, and women comprise well over half of our tenured or tenure track faculty. Currently, the School does not track LGBTQ students, staff or faculty. However, both the University and School follow non-discrimination policies. (https://provost.gwu.edu/important-personnel-policies-0)

From the School strategic planning document: The SPH has the opportunity to create a more welcoming academic community that is more supportive of all of its members – faculty, students and staff, from multiple disciplines and regardless of race/ethnic, gender, sexual orientation and other aspects. First, although we have made great strides with diversity, we recognize the need to make enhancement of diversity a priority in searches and selection of chairs,

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 91 faculty, students and staff. Second, we recognize that the culture within the SPH, our collective identity, set of values, and definition of where we want to be in the future, is still in a state of transition.

Objectives 1. Support diversity of administrators, faculty, staff and students. 2. Support formal faculty/researcher orientation and mentoring. 3. Governance structure and systems that reflect the diverse constituency that exists in the School. iii. Policies that support a climate free of harassment and discrimination and that value the contributions of all forms of diversity; the school should also document its commitment to maintaining/using these policies.

The University is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action (EEO/AA) employer committed to maintaining a non-discriminatory, diverse work environment. The university does not unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, genetic information, or on any other basis prohibited by applicable law in any of its programs or activities. Policies related to Equal Employment Opportunity can be found at: http://hr.gwu.edu/policies-procedures. The School upholds the values of the university and complies with all policies related to hiring and treatment of faculty, staff and students. iv. Policies that support a climate for working and learning in a diverse setting.

At the University level, all members of the GW community are encouraged to expand their ideas and attitudes about diversity by viewing the GW website on “valuing diversity”: http://ode.hr.gwu.edu/valuing-diversity. The University Statement of Ethical Principles can be found at http://hr.gwu.edu/statement-ethical-principles. This statement sets forth standards of ethical conduct to which all persons acting on the university’s behalf should aspire.

In addition to fostering attitudes and behaviors, the SPH had a unique opportunity to create a physical environment that embodies our commitment to inclusion and respect for diversity when we designed and built our new building. Included in the building are 1) automated wheel chair accessible bathrooms and office suites on two floors; 2) a transgender bathroom; 3) a mother’s room with a refrigerator; 4) an abundance of private and public spaces for students to work collaboratively or individually, meditate or pray; 5) kitchens for students with refrigerators and microwaves so that students have the option of bringing, storing and preparing their own food. v. Policies and plans to develop, review and maintain curricula and other opportunities including service learning that address and build competency in diversity and cultural considerations.

The department-level curriculum committees review course and program content related to diversity and inclusion and in line with program mission, vision and values. Refer to Criteria 1.8.6 below for a table of relevant course content.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 92

At the undergraduate level, we support service learning. The School currently offers one service learning course. vi. Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse faculty.

The SPH follows the University Office of Faculty and Recruitment & Personnel Relations processes: http://provost.gwu.edu/recruitment-process#aed. For faculty, it is mandated that every faculty search committee appoints a faculty diversity advocate, who is a full voting member of the committee and has specific duties and responsibilities, which are found in ERF 1.8.a: Faculty Diversity Advocates.

The diversity advocate’s role is to advance the University’s commitment to “intentionally act to create a diverse and inclusive community.” This is accomplished not only by monitoring all phases of the search process and being an advocate for diversity and inclusion but also by leading discussions on strategies for developing a diverse pool, assisting the committee in a self-assessment about potential biases (videos and self-assessment tools are provided), or suggesting additional outreach activities as necessary based on the applicant pool. While the diversity advocate is identified after the search committee is assembled, one of the first tasks is to work with the committee on developing a position announcement that would attract a diverse applicant pool including women, persons of color, persons with disabilities and veterans. During the applicant evaluation process, the diversity advocate helps eradicate bias, prejudice or stereotyping that might be noticed during discussions of applicants, interview questions, or verbal communications. If insufficient outreach was done to attract a diverse pool, the diversity advocate can recommend additional outlets to tap into diverse populations. The diversity advocate verifies that each search follows University guidelines in the search process and that good faith efforts were made to meet the goal of diversity and inclusion.

One area where we have been challenged is in the percent of faculty of Hispanic origin. We are excited about the recent recruitment of a senior faculty member in the Department of Global Health; Dr. Carlos Santos-Burgoa. Dr. Santos-Burogoa started with the School in August 2015. Additionally, Dr. Matias Attene Ramos has recently accepted our offer to join our faculty in the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health. We hope that recruitment of these established practitioners and scholars will attract more students of Hispanic origin. vii. Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse staff.

The University and the School are committed to maintaining diversity in the workplace and providing an environment that supports equal opportunity. For details of the University hiring and workplace policies: http://hr.gwu.edu/maintaining-diversity-workplace. These policies govern accommodations for religious beliefs and practices, employees with disabilities, affirmative action, an environment that does not tolerate harassment and equal opportunity.

Summary policy: https://provost.gwu.edu/important-personnel-policies-0

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 93

Separate policies: Equal Employment Opportunity http://my.gwu.edu/files/policies/EqualEmploymentOpportunityStatement.pdf Disability http://my.gwu.edu/files/policies/DisabilitiesFINAL.pdf Religious Accommodation http://my.gwu.edu/files/policies/ReligiousAccommodationFINAL.pdf Non-Retaliation http://my.gwu.edu/files/policies/NonRetaliationFINAL.pdf viii. Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain and graduate a diverse student body.

The SPH is committed to recruiting and enrolling a diverse class reflective of the communities we seek to serve. We have nurtured the Black Public Health Student Association and have helped to support their annual health disparities conference which is held at the SPH every other year. The Office of Recruitment and Admissions participates in recruitment events targeted at minority student populations, including the Tri-State Summer Medical and Dental Education Program (SMDEP) for the last two years, the Atlanta University Consortium (Clarke, Moorehouse, Spellman), and the UC Davis Annual Pre-Medical and Pre- Health Conference, which primarily focuses on underrepresented students in the health care field. When our admissions team visits campus fairs, they specifically do outreach to any minority public health or related groups, to the extent they exist on that campus. The admissions team also travels to many urban areas with diverse populations (this past year : New York City, Boston, Miami, Chicago, Atlanta, Ann Arbor/Detroit, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, Newark, New Orleans, and Baltimore).

For calendar year 2015, we have continued to attend the fairs mentioned above, and also added the SMDEP mid-Atlantic event in June, as well as the National Hispanic Medical Association Recruitment Fair in March. Additionally, the recruitment staff is evaluating fairs that would have a significant representation of LGBTQ students exploring health professions. The SPH Admissions Committee continuously evaluates our admissions and recruitment processes and results. The admissions team reports to the Graduate Student Admissions Committee on a monthly basis from September through May.

While we do not provide need-based financial assistance based on personal financial data, the Dean has made a commitment to fund any shortfalls for all Gates scholars, starting in 2014. To date we have provided $26,898 to 3 Gates Scholars. The School has had three Gates Scholars in each of the past two academic years. ix. Regular evaluation of the effectiveness of the above-listed measures.

Diversity of faculty, students and staff is evaluated annually. As noted, faculty searches are monitored for inclusiveness by a member of each search committee. The Admissions Committee reviews diversity numbers and discusses strategies to retain or improve diversity through targeted marketing and events.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 94

For students, we also survey their perceptions of the university and school environment through the Graduate Student Graduation Survey (GSGS). The GSGS is conducted each year between mid-March and the end of May for students who have completed or are completing their degree in the current academic year. As part of this exit survey, graduating students are asked questions about their own perceptions of the culture. Overall, the university earned a positive response from approximately 72% of the students. Below are results from students who graduated from the School of Public Health from calendar years 2012 through 2014.

Table 1.8.a.ix.: GSGS Results Question 2012 2013 2014 Percent that completed survey/number of responses 77%/251 79%/275 71%/220 Percent of Students who agreed or strongly agreed to the following questions: Students in my school are treated with respect by faculty 82% 85% 85% Overall, the climate in the program is positive 82% 86% 85% Environment at GW is supportive of persons of diverse 83% 85% 85% ethnic/racial backgrounds

1.8.b. Evidence that shows the plan or policies are being implemented. Examples may include mission/goals/objectives that reference diversity or cultural competence, syllabi, and other course materials, lists of student experiences demonstrating diverse settings, records and statistics on faculty, staff and student recruitment, admission and retention.

Core values: Diversity is one of the nine core Values of the University http://hr.gwu.edu/values. The SPH Strategic plan includes the following core values:

Diversity: Inclusiveness, and a desire to create an environment that welcomes students, faculty and staff regardless of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, social class and religion, and incorporates a diverse array of perspectives and experiences.

Respect: Respect for the rights of individuals and communities, and adherence to the highest ethical principles in working with individuals, communities, and colleagues; treatment of others with courtesy and dignity.

Curriculum: These values are reflected in our curriculum, which is reviewed annually by each department Curriculum Committee to ensure that the curriculum aligns with the mission, vision and values of the School and individual program. In the table below are some (of many) examples of course content related to diversity and inclusion goals.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 95

Table 1.8.b.: Diversity and Inclusion in the SPH Curriculum

Course Title Course Number Relevant content Health & Environment PUBH 3132 (UG) Environmental justice unit Environmental & Occupational PUBH 6121 Extensive discussion of environmental justice Epidemiology Assessment & Control of PUBH 6126 Potential exposure differences for vulnerable Environmental Hazards groups Communication Science for PUBH 6134 Cultural awareness in science communication Public Health Global Health Program PUBH 6436 Components in an ethical global health Management and Leadership programs

1.8.c. Description of how the diversity plan or policies were developed, including an explanation of the constituent groups involved.

University

In late spring 2010, George Washington University President Steven Knapp created the Council on Diversity and Inclusion to: “Propose a series of best practices that benefit all members of the GW community, enhance the experience of traditionally underrepresented populations, and cultivate a more inclusive climate for students, staff, faculty and the broader community of which George Washington is an integral part.” Link: www.diversity.gwu.edu. This Council consisted of 16 members drawn from virtually all parts of the GW community, including students, faculty, staff, and alumni from various schools and other units of the university. The Council members lead four working group discussions. The Council met from October 2010 through May 2011. School faculty and staff participating in this process included Dante Verme and Monica Partsch. Other faculty, including Vanessa Northington Gamble, Josef Reum and Susan Wood, also represented the School on this council, which remains active. The result of their work was a series of recommendations to the President of the University. In addition to creating the Council, President Knapp added a new position to the senior administrative staff of the University, and appointed Dr. Terri Harris Reed as the Vice Provost for Diversity and Inclusion. One of the first tasks of the new Vice Provost was to develop the Institution Diversity Statement: https://diversity.gwu.edu/sites/diversity.gwu.edu/files/downloads/gw_statement_on_diversi ty_and_inclusion.pdf

School

Refer to Criteria 1.1.e for a detailed description of the planning process that the School has undertaken prior to and following the separation from the Medical Center. Many discussions of diversity and inclusiveness occurred through this process, and as a result diversity was included as a core value.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 96

Through the Academic Program Review process departments work collectively to re-evaluate their mission, vision, values and goals.

1.8.d. Description of how the plan or policies are monitored, how the plan is used by the school and how often the plan is reviewed.

From the SPH Strategic Plan we monitor our plan by:

• Reporting, at least once year, faculty, staff and student diversity statistics by gender and racial/ethnic categories. Improve the accuracy and the collection of diversity-related data; • At all levels consider diversity in recruitment and advancement of faculty and staff; • Promote diversity by rank, classification, departmental affiliation, gender and race/ethnicity of the SPH faculty in faculty governance.

Students: The Admissions Committee reviews student demographics every term. When we see areas of challenge we develop a strategy to address the need. For example, the undergraduate curriculum committee has been discussing ways to attract more students of color. To this end, we will be sending faculty to relevant undergraduate student organizations and housing to explain our BS-PH. We are also providing opportunities for students who take our introductory undergraduate PH courses to learn more about our degree program. These classes are much more diverse than our undergraduate cohort. We hope to be able to identify students interested in public health during their first or early second year of undergraduate education so that we can advise them on courses to take in preparation for applying to our program and to hopefully entice them to public health.

Staff: As mentioned above, the School adheres to the hiring practices of the University to support a diverse and inclusive faculty and staff. While the staff hiring process does not include a diversity advocate per se, we strive to ensure that all search processes for staff include a diverse group to interview applicants and provide input on who is hired.

For faculty, academic departments and search committees play a key role in building faculty excellence and advancing faculty diversity. The School encourages search committees to maximize opportunities to recruit a diverse faculty and encourage search committees to:

• Value diversity and inclusion; • Understand and comply with University equal employment policies and procedures; • Discuss unconscious bias and how to prevent it from negatively affecting decisions and actions; • Recruit a qualified and diverse applicant pool, including targeted outreach to under-represented groups; • Interview top candidates fairly and equitably; and • Select the best, qualified person for the position.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 97

1.8.e. Identification of measurable objectives by which the school may evaluate its success in achieving a diverse complement of faculty, staff, and students, along with data regarding the performance of the program against those measures for each of the last three years. See CEPH Data Template 1.8.1. At a minimum, the school must include four objectives, at least two of which relate to race/ethnicity. Measureable objectives must align with the school’s definition of under-represented populations in Criterion 1.8.a.

Template 1.8.1.: CEPH Data Template 1.8.1 Diversity Outcomes Method Data Source Target AY AY AY AY Category/Definition of 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Collection Race: African Self report Banner 12% 7.8% 8.9% 8.3% 11.3% American Faculty Race: African Self report SOPHAS/ASPPH 15% 16.2% 14.2% 12.2% 15.7% American students Race: African Self Banner 20% 14.7% 18.2% 20.2% 18.3% American staff Report Ethnicity: Hispanic Self report Banner 7% 3.0% 2.4% 3.6% 4.0% Faculty Ethnicity: Hispanic Self report SOPHAS/ASPPH 7% 2.3% 2.9% 4.3% 6.7% Students Military: Students Self Office of 5% <1% 1.47% 2.24% 5.0% identify Military and Veteran Student Services

The School will aim to meet these targets through the following mechanisms: • Expansion of our financial aid to create a diverse portfolio that will attract a diverse student population (i.e. merit scholarships, assistantships, fellowships, training grants etc.) • Assure that all of those responsible for recruitment of students, faculty and staff are educated and committed to the SPH and GW diversity goals. • In our recruitment efforts engage our faculty in assisting the School in these efforts through reaching out to potential minority faculty recruits and providing an additional level of effort to persuade them to come to GW. • Expand and market academic programming that will attract a more diverse student body. (Example: offering residential students up to a third of the curriculum online to reduce costs of living in DC) • Hosting informational sessions in collaboration with our Public Health Students Association that will attract a diverse student body racially, ethnically, economically and internationally.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 98

• For administrative positions, work with search firms to identify diverse candidates for leadership positions.

1.8.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion. This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The University and School both hold diversity as one of their core values. • Commitment to diversity is included in the School Strategic Plan and throughout the program competencies and values. • Ethnic and racial diversity among faculty, students and staff.

Challenges: • Lower than average representation of Hispanics in both faculty and student populations.

Future Plans: • Increase diversity of staff more in alignment with DC metro area demographics

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 99

CRITERIA 2: INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS

2.1 DEGREE OFFERINGS. THE SCHOOL SHALL OFFER INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS REFLECTING ITS STATED MISSION AND GOALS, LEADING TO THE MASTER OF PUBLIC HEALTH (MPH) OR EQUIVALENT PROFESSIONAL MASTER’S DEGREE IN AT LEAST THE FIVE AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE BASIC TO PUBLIC HEALTH. THE SCHOOL MAY OFFER OTHER DEGREES, PROFESSIONAL AND ACADEMIC, AND OTHER AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION, IF CONSISTENT WITH ITS MISSION AND RESOURCES.

2.1.a. An instructional matrix presenting all of the school’s degree programs and areas of specialization. If multiple areas of specialization are available within departments or academic units shown on the matrix, these should be included. The matrix should distinguish between public health professional degrees, other professional degrees and academic degrees at the graduate level, and should distinguish baccalaureate public health degrees from other baccalaureate degrees. The matrix must identify any programs that are offered in distance learning or other formats. Non-degree programs, such as certificates or continuing education, should not be included in the matrix. See CEPH Data Template 2.1.1.

Template 2.1.1 below presents the academic programs offered at the School. We confer the following degrees: BS; MPH; MS; MHA; DrPH; and PhD. We also have joint degree programs with five other schools at The George Washington University: Columbian College of Arts and Sciences; School of Medicine and Health Sciences; Law; Elliott School of International Affairs; and College of Professional Studies. Offerings include residential, online and hybrid programs.

The School has a robust and vibrant curriculum with 16 distinct MPH tracks in several different specialty areas. These areas encompass foundational knowledge essential to developing a successful public health practice in all the core areas of public health knowledge. The curriculum is delivered through multiple modalities including face-to-face, online and hybrid. In Spring 2016 we will allow students more flexibility of programming; residential students will be able to take up to a third of their courses online and MPH@GW students can take up to a third of their courses on campus. The flexibility of course delivery formats will support our many students who travel for work or who have personal time constraints.

Additionally, the School offers both a residential MHA and an executive hybrid MHA track. The SPH also offers the doctorate of public health (DrPH) in four areas: Environmental and Occupational Health; Global Health; Health Behavior; and Health Policy. The doctorate of philosophy (PhD) is currently offered in Epidemiology and in Fall 2016 we will admit our first PhD class in Social and Behavioral Sciences in Public Health.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 100

CEPH Data Template 2.1.1 – Instructional Matrix

Department Specialization/Concentration/Focus Area Academic Professional

DOCTORAL DEGREES DrPH Environmental & Occupational Health Environmental & Occupational Health X DrPH Global Health Global Health X DrPH Prevention & Community Health Health Behavior X DrPH Health Policy & Management Health Policy X PhD Epidemiology & Biostatistics Epidemiology X PhD Prevention & Community Health Social & Behavioral Sciences1 X

MASTER DEGREES E-MHA (D) Health Policy and Management Health Administration X MHA Health Policy and Management Health Administration X MPH Environmental and Occupational Health Environmental Health Science and Policy X MPH EOH/Global Health Global Environmental Health X MPH Epidemiology and Biostatistics Biostatistics X MPH Epidemiology and Biostatistics Epidemiology X MPH Epidemiology and Global Health Global Health Epidemiology2 X MPH Exercise and Nutrition Sciences Physical Activity in Public Health X MPH Exercise and Nutrition Sciences Public Health Nutrition X MPH Global Health Global Health Communication X MPH Global Health Global Health Program Design, Monitoring & Evaluation X MPH Global Health Global Health Policy X MPH Health Policy and Management Health Policy X MPH Prevention and Community Health Community-Oriented Primary Care X MPH Prevention and Community Health Health Promotion X MPH Prevention and Community Health Maternal & Child Health X MPH Prevention and Community Health Public Health Communication & Marketing X MPH (D) Public Health MPH@GW X MS Epidemiology and Biostatistics Epidemiology X MS Epidemiology and Biostatistics Public Health Microbiology & Emerging Infectious Diseases X MS Exercise and Nutrition Sciences Strength & Conditioning X MS Health Policy and Management Health Policy X

JOINT DEGREES MPH/MS Physician Assistant/Public Health Joint MS PA-MPH: COPC, Epidemiology or Health Policy track X MPH/JD or LLM Law School/HPM Joint JD or LLM-MPH: Health Law & Health Policy X MPH/MD SMHS/Public Health Joint MD-MPH: any MPH track X MPH/MA Elliot School Int'l Affairs/Global Health Joint MA-MPH: Global Health tracks X MPH/Peace Corp Peace Corp/Public Health MPH with Peace Corp Masters International: any MPH Track X BSPH/MPH Public Health Public Health X MPH/Certificate HPM/College of Professional Studies Joint MPH-Certificate: MPH or MS, Health Policy/Certificate, HCC3 X MHA/Certificate HPM/College of Professional Studies Joint MHA-Certificate: MHA/Certificate, HCC3 X

OTHER GRADUATE Specialist Health Policy and Management Health Services Administration X

BACHELOR DEGREES BS Exercise and Nutrition Sciences Exercise Science Exercise Science- Pre-Athletic Training/Sports Medicine BS Exercise and Nutrition Sciences Concentration BS Exercise and Nutrition Sciences Exercise Pre-Medical Professional Concentration BS Exercise and Nutrition Sciences Exercise Science- Pre-Physical Therapy Concentration BS Public Health Public Health

OTHER UNDERGRADUATE Minor Exercise & Nutrition Sciences Exercise Science Minor Exercise & Nutrition Sciences Nutrition Minor Public Health Public Health

(D)- distance education/online program (E) - Executive 1 New Program- First cohort will matriculate fall 2016. 2 Global Health Epidemiology- currently not accepting students 3 HCC- Healthcare Corporate Compliance Certificate awarded from College of Professional Studies Recently deactivated programs that may have active students completing degree, not included above, include: MPH, Public Health Management; MS, Exercise Science-Clinical Exercise Physiology; and the BS, Exercise Science- Pre-Dietetics Concentration

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 101

2.1.b. The school bulletin or other official publication, which describes all degree programs identified in the instructional matrix, including a list of required courses and their course descriptions. The school bulletin or other official publication may be online, with appropriate links noted.

The University Bulletin http://www.bulletin.gwu.edu/ provides descriptions of all SPH programs as well as links to all University courses and summaries. Curricular information is also found on the School website: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics and through individual departmental webpages.

The School website, which also includes course summaries, is open to anyone. The short curricular guides have been combined in ERF 2.1.b.: SPH Programs-At-A-Glance

2.1.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Degree offerings are provided in a variety of formats and timelines to meet student needs (residential, online and hybrid programs). • Programs include various offerings in both professional and academic realms. • The School now confers the PhD in epidemiology. In the past, that degree was conferred through the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, even though the SPH faculty did most of the teaching. • Bundled elective courses to create two focus areas for the existing PhD Epidemiology program. This will provide an opportunity for students to concentrate in either physical activity or environmental health. • Collaborations with other Schools at the University to support joint programs. • Since the last accreditation, the School has added laboratory sciences and research opportunities for students. • With the opening of our own building, we can now provide more classrooms and meeting space for extra-curricular activities. • A new PhD program in Social and Behavioral Sciences in Public Health will welcome its first class in Fall 2016.

Challenges: • Joint programs with the PA program and MD program are very credit heavy and taxing on students. • The BS in public health and the BS programs in the Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences could be better aligned. • Finding new ways to make GW a financially attractive choice for top level students interested in public health. • Recruiting additional faculty to teach new and existing courses while increasing the school’s research portfolio.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 102

Future Plans: • Explore the feasibility of moving the PhD in Biostatistics to the School from the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. • Investigate potential joint MPH/MSN program with the School of Nursing. • Expand enrollment in the joint BS/MPH program. • Increase in undergraduate enrollment. • Offer more course format flexibility for the residential and online student populations. Will launch Spring 2016. • Secure additional funding (e.g., NIH training grants) for doctoral students.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 103

2.2. PROGRAM LENGTH. AN MPH DEGREE PROGRAM OR EQUIVALENT PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH MASTER’S DEGREE MUST BE AT LEAST 42 SEMESTER-CREDIT UNITS IN LENGTH.

2.2.a. Definition of a credit with regard to classroom/contact hours.

The School and Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) follow the Department of Education guidance for a credit hour. For residential programs on a semester system, for each credit hour, the SPH schedules 50 minutes of classroom or direct faculty instruction and a minimum of two hours of out-of-class student work per week. For all programs, work outside of the classroom can include: reading, reviewing selected videos, individual and group projects, interviews, and completing self- assessments and traditional assignments.

The MPH@GW is on an 11-week calendar consisting of 10-weeks of instruction and a final exam/project week. A two-credit course includes 80 minutes per week of asynchronous material, another 80 minutes per week of synchronous time in a small group with a session leader and two to three hours per week devoted to out-of-class work. For a three-credit course, we schedule 120 minutes per week of asynchronous material, another 120 minutes per week of synchronous time with classmates and instructor and three to four-and-a half hours per week outside work. The asynchronous materials are primarily pre-recorded lectures, panel discussions, or interviews. Synchronous sessions are guided by a faculty member and may include a number of activities, such as class discussions, case studies, problem solving, and student presentations.

The MHA@GW is an executive format program, which consists of eight, four to five-credit modules which are delivered online, and four face-to-face immersion experiences, ranging from one-and-a-half to three credits. Much like the MPH@GW program, the MHA@GW is offered on an 11-week calendar consisting of a 10-week course duration and a final exam/project week. All eight online modules have a weekly schedule that consists of: asynchronous content ranging between 60 and 120 minutes, 90 minutes of synchronous student-led team sessions, 120 minutes of synchronous faculty-led sessions, and 5 to 8 hours of outside reading and project based coursework. The total weekly contact time is four-and-a–half to five-and-a-half hours per week (11 week terms). The face-to-face immersions include 20 hours of contact time for a one-and-a-half credit experience and 40 hours of contact time for a three credit experience. For more information: http://mha.gwu.edu/academics/immersion-experiences/

Academic calendars for online and residential courses: Residential courses are scheduled for 14-week terms in the fall and spring. Summer sessions can be offered in 6, 8, 10 or 14 weeks sessions. Online programs are scheduled using an 11-week term, four quarters per year.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 104

2.2.b. Information about the minimum degree requirements for all professional public health master’s degree curricula shown in the instructional matrix. If the school or university uses a unit of academic credit or an academic term different from the standard semester or quarter, this difference should be explained and an equivalency presented in a table or narrative.

In all formats across all departments, the MPH degree is a 45-credit program. Both the residential and online MHA degrees require 50 credits.

2.2.c. Information about the number of professional public health master’s degrees awarded for fewer than 42 credit units, or equivalent, over each of the last three years. A summary of the reasons should be included.

No professional Master’s degrees have been awarded for fewer than 42 credit units over the last three years.

2.2.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

The criterion is met.

Strengths: • The length of our programs provides ample time for deep levels of instruction and practice. • New online programs provide more flexible educational opportunities for our students. • Students have flexibility and options in pursuing their degree, including access to online courses through MPH@GW or receiving in-depth training in a specific track, as suits their professional goals.

Challenges: • Adapting registrar and university systems to support hybrid education. • Blending online quarterly and residential semester programs can be challenging for students and administration regarding financial aid, student accounts and registrar systems. • In the quarter system used for the online degree programs, students who receive some scholarships, such as Gates, have not qualified as “full-time” even when they are enrolled in an equivalent number of credits as the students in the residential program.

Future Plans: • The School continues to strive to meet the needs of a diverse student body through evaluating program length and program delivery modes. By offering more options for blending residential and online learning we will be able to better accommodate student travel and work schedules. • For the MPH/MD joint program, we will explore opportunities with the School of Medicine to offer cross- credits where content may be duplicated. • Development of a customizable program for residential MPH students and specialized tracks for the online MPH students.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 105

2.3. PUBLIC HEALTH CORE KNOWLEDGE. ALL GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREE PUBLIC HEALTH STUDENTS MUST COMPLETE SUFFICIENT COURSEWORK TO ATTAIN DEPTH AND BREADTH IN THE FIVE CORE AREAS OF PUBLIC HEALTH KNOWLEDGE.

2.3.a. Identification of the means by which the school assures that all graduate professional degree students have fundamental competence in the areas of knowledge basic to public health. If the means is common across the school, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each program. See CEPH Data Template 2.3.1.

MPH All MPH degree students are required to take a 15-credit core curriculum. The five core knowledge areas of public health are addressed in this core, as shown in Template 2.3.1.a below. In addition, the required core MPH curriculum includes a two-credit course, PUBH 6001 Biological Concepts for Public Health, which provides an overview of current knowledge about the biological mechanisms of major diseases causing death and disability in the US and globally. As a result, students understand and can interpret the reciprocal relationships of genetic, environmental, and behavioral determinants of health and disease in an ecological context from a public health perspective.

Template 2.3.1.a: Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MPH Degree

Core Knowledge Area Course Title Course # Credits

Biostatistics Biostatistical Applications for PUBH 6002 3 Public Health Epidemiology Principles & Practice of PUBH 6003 3 Epidemiology Environmental Health Environmental & PUBH 6004 2 Sciences Occupational Health in a Sustainable World Health Services Management & Policy PUBH 6006 3 Administration Approaches to Public Health Social & Behavioral Social & Behavioral PUBH 6007 2 Sciences Approaches to Public Health

Program guides for individual MPH tracks are available here: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics/graduate/masters-programs

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 106

Residential MHA The MHA program incorporates the foundations of knowledge basic to public health by offering coursework that is applied to the health care industry. Core courses address business and medical informatics training, knowledge of health care systems, management theory, healthcare finance, ethics, law, policy, critical values in decision-making, and specialized topics relating to the healthcare industry. This 50-credit program requires 31 core credits in addition to three-nine credits of field experience. See Template 2.3.1.b below.

CEPH Data Template 2.3.1.b: Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MHA Degree Core Knowledge Area Course Title Course # Credits Medical Informatics HSML 6208 2 Health Services Information Biostatistics Applications HSML 6207 2 Quantitative Methods & Epidemiology HSML 6206 3 Quantitative Methods & Epidemiology HSML 6206 3 Epidemiology Health Services Finance HSML 6209 2 Health Services Financial Applications HSML 6210 2 Health Economics HSML 6211 2 Environmental & Occupational Environmental Health Sciences Health in a Sustainable World PUBH 6004 2 Community Health Social & Behavioral Sciences Management/Advocacy HSML 6212 2 Introduction to Health Management HSML 6203 2 Health Services Marketing & Planning HSML 6213 2 Human Resources Management & Health Services Administration Organizational Behavior HSML 6216 2 Seminar- Health Services Management & Leadership HSML 6218 2 Management- Acute Care Hospital HSML 6231 2 Managing/Skilled Nursing Facility HSML 6237 3 Ambulatory Care Management HSML 6238 2

For complete program information: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/health-administration-mha

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 107

Executive MHA This executive master’s program offers professionals working in healthcare and health services the opportunity to earn a Master of Health Administration degree and gain the skills and knowledge they need to assume a leadership role in their organizations. This hybrid program consists of eight “modules” that include pre-recorded, asynchronous content, live face-to-face online classes, live team sessions, immersive multimedia coursework; and team projects. The program also includes four face-to-face immersive experiences; two in leadership and ethics, one in health system analysis and one for the culminating experience final presentation.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 108

CEPH Data Template 2.3.1.c: Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for Executive MHA Degree Core Knowledge Area Course Title Course # Credits Medical Informatics & Decision HSML 6265/ Management Module 2 5 Economics and Quantitative HSML 6268/ Biostatistics Methods Module 5 5 HSML 6266/ Healthcare Financial Management Module 3 5 Capstone-Systems Thinking & HSML 62xx/ Learning Module 8 4 Economics and Quantitative HSML 6268/ Epidemiology Methods Module 5 5 Quality & Performance HSML 6269/ Improvement Module 6 5 HSML 6267/ Environmental Health Sciences Community Engagement Module 4 5 HSML 6267/ Community Engagement Module 4 5 HSML 6255/ Social & Behavioral Sciences Leadership & Ethics - I Immersion I 1.5 HSML 6256/ Leadership & Ethics- II Immersion II 3 Healthcare Management & HSML 6264/ Strategy Module 1 5 Medical Informatics & Decision HSML6265/ Management Module 2 5 HSML 6266/ Health Services Administration Healthcare Financial Management Module 3 5 Economics and Quantitative HSML 6268/ Methods Module 5 5 Quality & Performance HSML 6269/ Improvement Module 6 5 Capstone-Systems Thinking & HSML 62xx/ Learning Module 8 4 HSML 62xx/ Healthcare Law and Policy Module 7 5 For complete program information for the Executive MHA: http://mha.gwu.edu/.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 109

DrPH Degree Applicants to the DrPH program must have previously earned a MPH degree or the equivalent. Equivalency is evaluated for individual applicants based on whether they have had appropriate academic training in all five core areas of public health. If any areas are missing or weak, students are required to successfully complete relevant coursework at the master’s level prior to, or during, the first year of their doctoral program.

2.3.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The School-wide Curriculum Committee regularly reviews the MPH core courses. Each core course gets reviewed approximately once every two to three years. In the summer and fall of 2012, the School created working groups to examine all of the core courses. From these groups came the recommendation to combine PUBH 6005- Policy Approaches to Public Health and PUBH 6008 Management Approaches to Public Health, both two-credit courses, into one three-credit course, PUBH 6006, Management and Policy Approaches to Public Health. The new course has a much more integrated approach to teaching health policy and management and eliminated overlap between the two former courses. It became a requirement in the Fall of 2013. Student course evaluations for the new course have been consistently more favorable than the evaluations for the former two courses. Also, combining PUBH 6005 and PUBH 6008 freed up one elective credit. • The required two-credit course in Public Health Biology (PUBH 6001- Biological Concepts of Public Health) strengthens our students’ knowledge of determinants of health and disease. • As a result of the most recent CEPH accreditation process, we strengthened the public health core content of the residential MHA program.

Challenges: • To provide a broader range of options for students matriculating with various levels of core knowledge and competencies, we would like to offer multiple choices of our introductory courses, but do not yet have the faculty capacity to do so.

Future Plans:

• There is some discussion about whether we could further combine some of the core content through a case-based curriculum. We are planning to create an exploratory group to investigate this idea in the near future. • The curriculum committees throughout the School are reviewing the ASPPH “Framing the Future” reports to determine whether we need to make changes to the core in light of these new ideas.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 110

2.4 PRACTICAL SKILLS. ALL GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH DEGREE STUDENTS MUST DEVELOP SKILLS IN BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH CONCEPTS AND DEMONSTRATE THE APPLICATION OF THESE CONCEPTS THROUGH A PRACTICE EXPERIENCE THAT IS RELEVANT TO STUDENTS’ AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION.

2.4.a. Description of the school’s policies and procedures regarding practice experiences, including the following:

1. Selection of sites. 2. Methods for approving preceptors. 3. Opportunities for orientation and support for preceptors. 4. Approaches for faculty supervision of students. 5. Means of evaluating student performance. 6. Means of evaluating practice placement sites and preceptor qualifications. 7. Criteria for waiving, altering or reducing the experience, if applicable.

For a detailed description of our practicum experience for the MPH degree, see: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics/practicum. All necessary Practicum-related information and forms, for students and preceptors alike, can be found at this link.

During the Practicum, it is our goal for students to connect theory learned in the classroom with the reality of day-to-day work in public health. Ultimately, our aim is that students develop the practical skills in their Practicum experiences that will make them valued members of the workforce while also applying their newly developed knowledge and competencies in a non-academic setting. The Practicum is also an opportunity for our students to cultivate relationships through networking, negotiating, developing work plans, and interacting with their colleagues both within and beyond the scope of the project and work site.

1. Selection of sites As public health diversifies, the need for interdisciplinary and inter-professional teams from across the social impact arena also grows with it. At the SPH, part of our mission is to prepare students to be impactful workers across the entire field of public health. We have sought to assure that students have opportunities to gain experience at a broad range of sites, from traditional public health settings such as government health agencies, local health centers, non-profits, and policy think tanks, to business development groups, consulting firms, building councils and other organizations.

Candidate organizations become known to us via a number of referral mechanisms. The School maintains a database of practicum opportunities. While students also interact regularly with departmental faculty and staff dedicated to advising them on the numerous practice opportunities within the School’s network. These connections are important, as site/preceptor selection can impact how the student’s

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 111 practicum plans align with the departmental and track-specific practice competencies. In addition to the departmental advisory services, the Dean’s Office, the Office of Student Affairs, the Career Center and our student organizations host networking events designed to introduce students to public health and social impact organizations, and to enhance and expand the School’s practice platform. We also directly engage relevant organizations. This year alone, meetings with NACCHO, ASTHO, APHA, HHS, and Metro Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) promise to yield good returns for both our students and these organizations. Often it is day-to-day interactions between our faculty, staff, and outside organizations and agencies (e.g., PAHO, the DC DOH, and local and state health agencies) that generate and sustain partner interest in hosting our students for their practica.

The overall objectives in practicum plans are written in collaboration with the Preceptor and must be aligned with the learning objectives of the program and the track. Practicum site selection is done on an individual basis, meaning that the scope, focus, and approach taken in the experience will vary depending on the degree and track the student is pursuing, departmental and program considerations, and the students’ individual professional goals, interests, and objectives.

Site and preceptor applications are linked in our online system where site preceptors must provide us with basic information about the site, their physical address, points of contact, and other pertinent information to assure us the organization is a bona fide one. Once this information has been reviewed, the system electronically notifies preceptors as to whether or not their site and preceptor applications have been approved. This review starts at the departmental level where a Practicum Director reviews and approves the sites before the school-level review is completed by the Associate Dean for Practice.

Once a site is approved, the system allows students to apply to be linked to that preceptor and site. Once this linkage is established, the student must upload a practicum plan for review by their departmental Practicum Advisor. This plan contains learning objectives that we require to be aligned with the program and track academic competencies. A Practicum may not commence until the plan is approved by the Advisor.

Practicum partners are an important part of the professional development network we build for our students, but there are internal components for that network as well. Primary among those is the Interdisciplinary Student Community-Oriented Prevention Enhancement Service (ISCOPES) program wherein students from the schools of public health, medicine, nursing, and education collaborate in a year-long, innovative, inter-professional service-learning program. ISCOPES is a volunteer workforce development opportunity, and does not serve as a Practicum site, but the skills students learn are transferred to the work they do for their Practicum and Culminating Experiences. More information about ISCOPES is available in Criteria 3.2.e- Workforce Development.

2. Methods for approving preceptors As the individuals responsible for the onsite management, mentorship, and evaluation of students, preceptors are carefully screened. At the SPH, this process falls to the department’s Practicum Directors

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 112 and the Associate Dean for Practice. Prior to gaining full access to the online system, every preceptor’s profile is reviewed by a Practicum Director and then approved by the Associate Dean for Practice, similar to what is done with sites. These approvals all take place within our online system where we pay particular attention to each prospective Preceptor’s education, work history, and duration of their experience since attaining their most recent degree. Applicants with a health-related degree such as an MPH, DrPH, PhD in a public health field, MD, DO, etc. are required to have at least three years of independent work experience since attaining that degree. Those holding “non-health” masters / doctoral degrees need five years of experience; those without a master’s degree need a minimum of 10 years of work experience.

Applying this rubric to the selection of preceptors helps us ensure that the professionals we have working with our students are able to mentor them, assist in their practice endeavors, and help them develop professionally.

3. Opportunities for orientation and support for preceptors Preceptors are introduced to the school by several methods. Some come to us directly via our networks of students, staff and faculty. We host events, such as “Practicum CONNECT” to introduce prospective preceptors to our students and practice operations. Often we identify practicum preceptors via their participation in one of our numerous research projects, at events held on campus and in the District or when we attend professional meetings. At times our students identify potential preceptors; others are identified via our extensive alumni network. Preceptors referred to us are encouraged to review the online Preceptor guidebook and the slides from our Preceptor training resources (available on our website). They also have access to all our departmental Practice Advisors.

Each Spring semester we host a live, on-campus preceptor training. Typically 15-25 preceptors attend this two-hour event where they have a chance to meet and ask questions of the Associate Dean for Practice and others. At the end of each academic year, the Dean hosts a Preceptor Appreciation luncheon where we thank our practice partners for working with our students.

4. Approaches for faculty supervision of students Each department has at least one faculty member assigned to the function of advising and guiding students through their practicum experience along with staff members to assist with the coordination of student efforts. In smaller departments, the faculty member may also be the Practicum Director. The School provides a general student orientation for academics, practice, and research; our departments independently augment this with sessions designed to introduce students to the competencies and objectives that are specific to each area of concentration. Faculty that oversee the practicum experience have access to the online system that students use to log their hours and upload their mid-cycle reports (ERF 2.4.a: Department Practicum Directors). Hence, regardless of where the practicum is physically taking place, faculty can follow student progress and help address any issues or challenges that might arise during the practicum.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 113

5. Means of evaluating student performance In consultation with the department/program Practicum Director, students are required to identify up to three program competencies to target in their practicum in order to ensure a robust learning experience. After logging the required 120 hours, students are required to complete a self-assessment; a two-part Final Evaluation which includes a Practicum Report; and a Practicum Assessment. For the final Practicum Report/Evaluation, each student will:

• Outline the learning objectives targeted; • Demonstrate how the practicum related to the relevant program/track competencies and MPH coursework; • Illustrate ways in which the practicum offered the opportunity to gain new skills or learn new information as it relates to public health; • Specify any challenges faced during the practicum; • Describe the most rewarding aspects of the practicum experience; • Explain how the practicum contributed to the development of specific career goals; and • Share thoughts on the site/preceptor/experience.

A few examples of how students link learning outcomes (LO) with competencies include:

• Environmental Health Competency: Assess environmental and occupational exposures. LO: Use air-monitoring equipment correctly for taking meaningful workplace samples. • Global Health Competency: Apply knowledge of global health patterns and determinants in support of global health research. LO: Conduct a needs assessment in response to avian influenza in Uganda. • Health Policy Competency: Assess the methodology and quality of research results. LO: Synthesize and summarize health care policy news as it relates to children, low-income families, and Medicaid.

As noted above, in the Student Practicum Final Evaluation/Practicum Report & Practicum Assessment, students are asked to outline the identified learning objectives and describe to what degree they were able to meet them during the practicum experience. Examples of final practicum reports are located in ERF 2.4.a.: Student Practicum Final Evaluation/Practicum Report Samples.

For the Practicum Assessment, each student rates the practicum experience, provides feedback on the materials, and rates the support they received while engaged in this aspect of their education

The Practicum Final Evaluation/Practicum Report & Practicum Assessment serves as a tool for the Practicum Director and Faculty Advisor to evaluate the student’s work. It is also an opportunity to document the success achieved in the engagement with the practicum site.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 114

Site Preceptors submit an evaluation assessing each student’s performance. See ERF 2.4.a.: Preceptor Evaluation Form and Preceptor Evaluation Samples. The final decision regarding the student’s grade is made by the faculty member serving as the department’s Practicum Director. This decision is based upon the student’s Final Evaluation and the Site Preceptor’s Evaluation. . Follow these links to learn about some representative MPH student practicum experiences: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/departments/environmental-and-occupational- health/practice-experience and http://intrahealth.tumblr.com/post/130284642728/empowered-health- workers-powerful-health-systems.

6. Means of evaluating practice placement sites and preceptor qualifications Prior to receiving practice placement, Site Preceptors are required to submit a Practicum Site Application and a Site Preceptor Application; these are reviewed at both the department and the school levels. To be approved, Site Preceptors must demonstrate substantial experience in public health (or related disciplines), the ability to actively engage students in their work, commitment of time to contribute to a student’s professional development, and the willingness to provide constructive feedback and guidance.

When a practice placement is completed, students evaluate the site, preceptor, and the practicum experience as a whole via completion of the “Final Evaluation” ERF 2.4.a.: Practicum Student Evaluation Form. Examples of Student Evaluations are included in ERF 2.4.a.: Student Practicum Evaluation Samples. This information is considered in future years when approving sites for future practice placements.

7. Criteria for waiving, altering or reducing the experience, if applicable. The SPH has a diverse student body with some graduate students coming to us with years of experience in public health or related fields. We strongly encourage all students to pursue a practicum; many of our students complete internships in addition to the required practice experience. After consultation with their academic and practice advisors, some of our more experienced students take the opportunity to seek other elective credits by using their prior work experience to waive the Practicum and replace it with courses that better serves their professional and academic development needs.

In order to do this, students are asked to complete the Practicum Experience Equivalency form – available here: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/practicum/download/PEE.pdf – in which special attention is paid to the work they were engaged in and how that work aligns with the competencies of their academic program. We also consider their length of service in the field.

Note: The Practicum requirements are essentially the same for all of the tracks of the MPH, regardless of delivery modality. The Practicum guide, preceptor guide and reporting requirements are the same across all programs and are included in the ERF. Briefly stated, the practicum is a planned, supervised and evaluated practice experience in the student’s field of study within public health designed to achieve certain learning objectives. It consists of 120 hours of real-world work experience completing tasks on-site that is then evaluated by both the supervising preceptor in the field in conjunction with the GW Practicum Coordinator.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 115

MHA Degree

Practice experiences in the MHA program occur over the entire duration of the two-year program. An emphasis on experiential learning and community service are particular strengths of the program. From the very beginning, students are provided the opportunity for professional development. On Fridays, one of three professional enhancement experiences is offered: 1) Executive in Residence (EIR), where outside executives come to campus to discuss their own professional roles and careers; 2) site visits to local organizations of all types; and 3) professionalization time, wherein program faculty provide instruction on relevant skills, attire, work behavior, etc.

In addition, MHA degree candidates in our residential program are required to complete an administrative residency or an internship. Both are structured and monitored experiences that include on-site mentors and on-campus faculty advisers. Based on advisement, counseling, introspection, and career goals, students are assisted by faculty, a Residency Director, alumni mentors, and executives in residence (EIRs) to identify a suitable field experience and find an appropriate preceptor and organization. The process builds on students’ work experience and courses taken in the didactic portion of the Program.

The field experience consists of either a nine-credit Residency or a three-credit Internship. There are two MHA focus areas that require the field experience of a Residency: 1) Acute and Ambulatory Care Management; and 2) Post-acute Care Management (includes Long Term care). There are three focus areas that require the field experience of an Internship: 1) Information Systems and Financial Management; 2) Operations Management; and 3) Strategic Management and Policy. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/health-administration-mha.

A required three-credit course, Field Problem Studies (HSML 6271), is the internship consisting of work experience guided by a qualified preceptor on selected management and planning issues and problems occurring in health services facilities, programs, and agencies. The field experience option is primarily for advanced masters and doctoral students. The residency is a year-long work experience guided by a qualified preceptor. Periodic written progress reports and a written major report or selected field projects are required for completion.

MHA students in our Executive MHA program are not required to complete an administrative residency, as explained below.

Site and preceptor selection and vetting Residency and internship sites are chosen from the ACHE website, http://www.ache.org/postgrad/directory.cfm, as well as previously successful sites and via referral from our alumni network. All sites and preceptors are reviewed by the program's experiential committee, which currently includes Drs. R. Burke, Masselink and Friedman. To orient preceptors, we require that they participate in an orientation webinar conducted by our faculty.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 116

Evaluation of sites New sites are visited by one of our full-time faculty members. During this visit, the faculty member will meet with the senior management and ascertain relevant resources for students to successfully complete their residency/internship. We also ask to review the organization’s annual report. Many times these organizations report that internships and residencies are part of their community benefit that is required by the Affordable Care Act.

Evaluation of Student Performance Prior to starting an experiential learning module, students must create a project proposal that meets the approval of the MHA program faculty. During the experience, students in both the residency and internship programs are required to complete monthly and semester reports, which are reviewed by their faculty mentors. Preceptors are also required to evaluate the students. Finally, while students are at a residency site, one of the faculty members conducts a site visit to ascertain student progress and professionalism, as well as the work environment of the site. These site visits can either be in person or through the web, as often occurs with sites that we have used before.

Executive MHA As noted earlier, the Executive MHA is unique in that students must already have at least three years of work experience in a relevant healthcare organization and be currently employed in such a setting in order to matriculate into the program. (Relevant work experience is determined by departmental faculty). Much of the curriculum and many of the required assignments are directly linked to the student’s work environment. Consequently, there is no required practice experience, such as an internship or residency.

DrPH The DrPH achieves the practice experience through both course work and extra-curricular requirements. In PUBH 8402, Leadership in Public Health Practice and Policy, students focus on principles of public health practice and policy with a focus on the interdisciplinary and strategic application of skills, knowledge and competencies necessary both to perform public health core functions and to enhance the capacity to perform these functions.

Students are also required to complete four credits of professional leadership courses; PUBH 8415, Instructional Leadership, a two-credit course; and PUBH 8413, a research leadership course. In PUBH 8415, students participate in a range of activities designed to develop and enhance their teaching skills. These activities include course development; teaching master’s level courses; acting as a teaching assistant for undergraduate or introductory graduate courses; advising students about their class performance; evaluating student performance; and developing remedial programs for students. In the research leadership course, students participate in a range of activities designed to develop and enhance their research methods and analytical skills. These activities include participating in the development and submission of sponsored research proposals; being formally affiliated with a research project; assuming

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 117 responsibility for completing a real-world research project; and engaging in empirical data collection and analysis efforts.

Professional Enhancement Requirement All degree-seeking students must also complete a Professional Enhancement requirement. Students must participate in eight hours per degree program of advisor pre-approved Public Health-related lectures, seminars, and symposia related to their field of study. Professional Enhancement activities supplement the academic curriculum and help prepare students to participate actively in their professional communities. Opportunities for professional enhancement are regularly publicized via the SPH Listserv and through departmental communication and advisors. Students must submit documentation of Professional Enhancement activities to the Office of Student Records: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics/forms.

2.4.b. Identification of agencies and preceptors used for practice experience for each of the last three years.

The table below shows the number of students in the residential and online MPH tracks completing the practicum. The full list of agencies and preceptors is located in ERF 2.4.b.: Practica Agencies.

Table: 2.4.b.: Number of MPH Practica Completed AY2012-13 AY2013-14 AY2014-15 Residential 285 242 238 MPH@GW New program – none 7 110 Total 285 249 312

All of the MHA residential students must complete either a residency or an internship. A list of residency and internship sites for 2014 for the MHA can be found here: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/master-health-administration-residency-and-internship-sites

2.4.c. Data on the number of students receiving a waiver of the practice experience for each of the last three years.

The number of MPH@GW students receiving waivers is relatively higher than the residential program since these students are, on average, older and have far more working experience. All residential MHA students must complete a residency or internship plus thesis option so there are no waivers, and as explained above, the executive MHA program does not include a residency.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 118

Table 2.4.c.: Practica Waivers Number of Students per Calendar Year Department 2012 2013 2014 EOH 2 2 3 EPI/BIO 0 4 1 EXNS 0 0 0 GH 1 2 2 HPM 1 1 1 PCH 3 0 2 MPH@GW N/A N/A 19 TOTAL 7 9 28

2.4.d. Data on the number of preventive medicine, occupational medicine, aerospace medicine and general preventive medicine and public health residents completing the academic program for each of the last three years, along with information on their practicum rotations.

Not Applicable.

2.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Large and diverse practicum and preceptor opportunities in a variety of settings. • Strong connections with federal agencies such as HRSA, HUD, FDA, EPA, USDA, Pentagon, national organizations such as APHA, NACCHO, and ASHTO, and global health organizations including WHO, IMF, the World Bank, and PAHO make it easier to place students who live, work, and study in close proximity to these agencies all year round. • ISCOPES - Interdisciplinary health focused service-learning initiative that places GW students and employees from various fields of study as well as community partners and neighbors from the DC Metro Area in inter-professional learning communities to address bigger picture health issues through smarter service. • Department-specific advising. • Since the last CEPH accreditation, we have added the Office of Practice and hired an Associate Dean of Practice. • Bi-annual reception for all the preceptors. • Formalized online structure to assess sites, preceptors and students. • Obtain full state authorization for training students in the MPH@GW program before accepting students from that specific state. • In the past three years, 99% of our preceptors have indicated that they would be interested in hosting another SPH student.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 119

Challenges: • The current practicum database is cumbersome, overly complicated, and challenging to search. • The “Office of Practice” sees the potential to improve the student practice experience across the full spectrum including internships, practicum experiences, and integrating practice into coursework and culminating experiences. • Increased enrollment in the MPH@GW will require the vetting of additional practicum sites and preceptors. • We would like to garner travel funds to support students wishing to travel abroad for their practica. • We have an opportunity to better coordinate academic, practice and career advising services.

Future Plans: • Migration of practicum data to our newly developed Simplicity (GWorks) database. • Continued development and definition of scope for our Practice Office. • Building on our existing Practicum Advisory Committee*, establish an Academic Public Health Practice Committee to coordinate practicum efforts and governance across our six departments, and to identify and implement best practices school-wide. • Explore novel practice partnerships via new funding streams and business models. • Raise the profile of outstanding practice partnerships by featuring them in SPH publications, events, website, etc.

*Practicum Advisory Committee

Pierre Vigilance, MD, MPH, chair Ann Goldman, MA, MPH & Toni Thibeaux, MPH - Epi / Bio Lara Cartwright Smith, JD, MPH - Health Policy & Management Peter LaPuma, PhD, MBA, MS & Sabrina McCormick, PhD, MA - EOH Kelley Vargo, MS, MPH & Sarah Kennedy, MPH – MPH@GW Shaneka Thurman, MS – Global Health Kim Robien, DNsc, MS & Loretta DiPietro, PhD, MS, MPH – ExNS Karyn Pomerantz, MLS, MPH & Tamara Henry, EdD, MA – PCH

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 120

2.5 CULMINATING EXPERIENCE. ALL GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREE PROGRAMS, BOTH PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL DEGREE PROGRAMS, IDENTIFIED IN THE INSTRUCTIOAL MATRIX SHALL ASSURE THAT EACH STUDENT DEMONSTRATES SKILLS AND INTEGRATION OF KNOWLEGE THROUGH A CULMINATING EXPERIENCE.

2.5.a. Identification of the culminating experience required for each professional public health and other professional degree program. If this is common across the school’s professional degree programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

Syllabi, rubrics, other culminating experience materials, and student sample work for each professional program are found in ERF 2.5.a.: Culminating Experience Syllabi and Other Materials.

MPH All students earning a MPH must complete a two-credit culminating experience (or capstone). A culminating experience (CE) is one that requires a student to synthesize and integrate knowledge acquired in coursework and other learning experiences and to apply theory and principles in a situation that approximates some aspect of professional practice. It is through this culminating experience (CE) that faculty members evaluate students’ mastery of the body of knowledge and proficiency in the required competencies for the MPH tracks.

The goal of the CE is for students to demonstrate knowledge and skills learned through their MPH coursework and practicum by applying the principles and methods of public health practice to a public health issue. The MPH program offers a variety of options for achieving this goal. Thus, while the MPH program requires a capstone experience, how this experience is delivered varies among our MPH tracks.

MPH@GW Since the majority of our MPH students online are geographically removed from campus, we dedicated significant thought and discussion as to the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of the CE experience for these students. After a couple of iterations, we have developed the following plan. The assessment of student competency in the CE is achieved by requiring that students successfully complete a number of sequential steps in the process leading to the final culminating experience project. By structuring the CE course so that faculty serve as CE advisors (with a faculty student ratio of about 1:10), we are able to ensure that students receive intensive one-on-one mentoring and oversight from faculty with extensive experience in advising CE projects. Students are not allowed to proceed to a subsequent step of the CE process unless they have received approval (in the form of “credit” or “no credit”) from the faculty advisor.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 121

Dr. Kathleen Roche, Associate Professor in the Department of Prevention and Community Health, oversees the culminating experience for the MPH@GW program. The CE is a two-term, two-credit experience. Dr. Roche ensures consistency and coordination of the different CE sections by (1) selecting faculty especially well-suited to advise and mentor students on the CE, (2) communicating in person, by email, and by phone with faculty throughout the term, in order to answer faculty questions and discuss any specific CE issues that arise.

Common among all MPH tracks is that the CE/capstone is two credits, independent work is required, and a final product that involves synthesis of previous coursework. Departments decide independently whether the CE receives a letter grade versus credit/no credit. Research options include 1) data collection and analysis (applied research project); 2) secondary data collection and analysis; 3) policy analysis; 4) meta analyses; 5) literature review; or 6) white paper. Final work products may include a proposal and final report, memos, written testimony, concept papers and oral presentations.

MHA The Program uses several criteria to ensure that students apply critical thinking, problem-solving and management knowledge, and skills in both didactic and operational settings. Residential students must choose between a residency or internship plus thesis option during their final year of the program. The residency or internship/thesis serves as the program CE.

Residency focus areas include either Acute and Ambulatory Care Management or Post-acute Care Management (including Long Term Care). Internship focus areas include Information Systems and Financial Management, Operations Management or Strategic Management and Policy.

The residency/internship experience enables students to apply their classroom experiences in healthcare operations and continue the transition from student to health services executive. The student is expected to continue their professional growth and development within each of the five domains and 31 competencies of the MHA Program. The residency/internship is directly coupled with the educational goal of, “preparing students for leadership roles in the field of health services management” and the objective of, “complementing didactic learning with a variety of formal and informal field experiences.” Students enroll in the residency only after all of the required and elective courses are completed. Students complete an internship typically enrolled during their final semester in the Program. In extraordinary circumstances, an internship can stretch over two semesters.

Executive MHA The culminating experience in this program runs concurrently with the final three modules. Concurrent with Module Six students enroll in HSML 6272, a one-credit course entitled Organizational Research Project, Part 1. This course is designed to prepare the MHA@GW students to undertake the

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 122 organizational research project. By the end of this course students will have chosen between one of three options:

1. Organizational Research/Evaluation – this project asks the student to perform an applied research project in their organization or engage in the evaluation of a current clinical or administrative effort. 2. Business Plan – using the Small Business Administration (or similar) template, develop a comprehensive business plan for a new strategic service unit or expansion of an existing SSU 3. Literature Review – this project is targeted at solving a specific operational issue of importance to the student’s organization. The project will include a comprehensive review of the literature in order to uncover prior work in the particular area along with best practices.

During HSML 6273, a one-credit course that runs concurrent with Module Seven, students will be developing, refining and potentially, beginning to implement their formal project proposals, based on the approved prospectus crafted in HSML 6272. The objective of the project proposal is similar to that of a dissertation proposal where the student demonstrates the requisite level of background and familiarity with the chosen project.

The proposal is intended to be a document describing the specific elements of the final project and must be submitted prior to the end of week two. Students should use a grant/briefing format that includes (at a minimum): statement of purpose, goals, objectives, and detailed outline of the approach being proposed. The proposal is to be approximately four-to-six pages in length.

Working with the organizational preceptor, the student is asked to develop and present a mid-point “implementation defense” no later than the final week of the term. The presentation on the 2GW platform should be no more than 10 minutes in length and include PowerPoint slides. Once approved by the preceptor and faculty advisor, the student is permitted to complete work on their project, which is formally presented during the live Immersion Four session.

Module Eight of the executive MHA program is titled “Systems Thinking and Learning in Healthcare.” The intent of this four-credit module is to synthesize the content covered in the first seven modules into a coherent whole using the theme of organizational systems as the means by which MHA@GW students can help create and sustain organizational excellence. This module will examine hard and soft systems theory, complexity, resilience, innovation, change management, high reliability and multiple learning modalities as applied to high performing healthcare organizations. Students will be introduced to a panel of leading thinkers and practitioners in these domains who will provide critical advice throughout the module.

Finally, in the last immersion (1.5 credits), students will present the findings of their organizational research projects and leadership portfolios. Feedback on the research projects will be provided by peers and a panel of healthcare leaders.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 123

DrPH The dissertation is the culminating experience for the DrPH. Students must complete required coursework and pass the comprehensive exam to be officially admitted to the candidacy phase of the program. A Dissertation FAQ document has been created to assist candidates http://publichealth.gwu.edu/services/students, and examples of the comprehensive exams can also be found in ERF 2.5.a. In the candidacy phase, students take a two-credit dissertation proposal preparation course (PUBH 8422- Advanced Health Care and Public Health Research Design) prior to defending their dissertation proposals before their Dissertation Chair and Research Committee. Students must complete between six to nine credits of dissertation research (PUBH 8423) before they may become eligible to defend their dissertation before their Dissertation Research Committee and two external examiners.

It is the expectation that students will work independently, under the guidance of a Dissertation Research Committee, to prepare an oral and written dissertation demonstrating their ability to analyze and solve a complex public health practice-based problem. A candidate's interpretation of the research results is expected to make a substantive, original contribution to the field of public health research and practice.

DrPH students generally devote about 18-30 months to the candidacy phase of the program. This includes time spent developing the dissertation topic, research approach, dissertation proposal and defense, completion of research, interpretation and presentation of findings, and final dissertation defense. Students can choose to prepare a traditional (comprehensive report) dissertation or choose a three-paper option, where three peer-review quality papers are completed prior to the defense. Students work closely with their Dissertation Research Committees, and especially their Committee Chairs, throughout the candidacy phase.

2.5.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Many CEs are advanced work that follows from the practicum experience, enhancing the connection between the academic experience and public health practice at GW. • The CE experience is rigorous. • Drawing on our strength of being located in Washington, DC, students are taking advantage of a wide range of opportunities to complete CEs. • Many of the CE projects are published in peer reviewed journals. • All doctoral students are expected to publish their dissertation work, and those choosing the three- paper model have been successful in publishing much of their research. • Increasingly sophisticated methodologies are being employed in CE data analyses by students. • We have continued to provide students with projects relevant to their individual research interests.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 124

Challenges: • Ensuring a uniformly high quality CE product from all students. • Providing adequate faculty advising for CEs as our enrolled MPH student population grows. • While residencies are funded in the MHA, internships are not.

Future Plans: • Ongoing review and modification of CE formats for the MPH programs. • Building faculty to support CE advising for the MPH@GW program.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 125

2.6 REQUIRED COMPETENCIES. FOR EACH DEGREE PROGRAM AND AREA OF SPECIALIZATION WITHIN EACH PROGRAM IDENTIFIED IN THE INSTRUCTIONAL MATRIX, THERE SHALL BE CLEARLY STATED COMPETENCIES THAT GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF DEGREE PROGRAMS. THE SCHOOL MUST IDENTIFY COMPETENCIES FOR GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH, OTHER PROFESSIONAL AND ACADEMIC DEGREE PROGRAMS AND SPECIALIZATIONS AT ALL LEVELS (BACHELOR’S, MASTER’S AND DOCTORAL).

2.6.a. Identification of a set of competencies that all graduate professional public health degree students and baccalaureate public health degree students, regardless of concentration, major or specialty area, must attain. There should be one set for each graduate professional public health degree and baccalaureate public health degree offered by the school (e.g., one set each for BSPH, MPH and DRPH).

The MPH Core Curriculum The Masters in Public Health is the cornerstone of public health practice. As such, graduates from the MPH program at the SPH need to have the skills, knowledge, attitudes and values that will serve them in diverse and varied roles. This foundation is provided through the core curriculum. Students in the MPH are encouraged to complete the core curriculum in their first year as the foundation for track-specific curricula, the practicum experience and the culminating experience. The MPH core consists of six courses, comprising 15 of the total 45 credits needed to complete the MPH. As already reported in Criteria 2.3, the courses are as follows:

Table 2.6.a.1: MPH Core Curriculum Course Number # Credits Course Name PUBH 6001 2 Biological Concepts of Public Health PUBH 6002 3 Bio statistical Applications for Public Health PUBH 6003 3 Principles & Practice of Epidemiology PUBH 6004 2 Environmental & Occupational Health in a Sustainable World PUBH 6006 3 Management & Policy Approaches to Public Health PUBH 6007 2 Social & Behavioral Approaches to Public Health

PUBH 6001, PUBH 6004 and PUBH 6007 provide the foundational knowledge for understanding the major contributors to both health and disease. PUBH 6002 and 6003 provide students with the methodological tools needed for public health practice, and finally PUBH 6006 focuses on management and policy approaches to public health at three different levels: the system, the organization, and the group/individual level. (Also included in the core are PubH 6014, the practicum experience, and PubH 6015 the culminating experience.)

The core competencies for the MPH core courses are as follows:

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 126

Table 2.6.a.2.: MPH Core Competencies

I= Introduced D= Developed M= Mastered PUBH 6001 PUBH 6002 PUBH 6003 PUBH 6004 PUBH 6006 PUBH 6007 Program specific competencies 1. Describe the major contributors to health and how they relate to important communicable and noncommunicable diseases in public I,D I I I,D health. 2. Describe the social, legal, ethical, economic, and political context of I D D I contemporary public health problems. 3. Describe the multidisciplinary nature of contemporary public health issues and the role that various professionals play in addressing these I I D I issues. 4. Build effective oral and written communication skills for communicating I I I M I,D with lay and public health audiences. 5. Identify and apply appropriate statistical analytical tools for hypothesis I,D I I testing (inferential statistics) and estimation. 6. Understand the historical context of some milestone public health I I I interventions through the past century. 7. Apply descriptive techniques commonly used to summarize public I,D I D I health data. 8. Interpret the results of statistical analyses in public health and health I I D I services research literature. 9. Use epidemiological data to in inform scientific, ethical, economic, and I I I,D I D I political discussions and health issues. 10. Synthesize relevant information in order to analyze policy implications I I D and participate in policy development. 11. Describe a public health problem in terms of magnitude, person, time I I I,D M I,D and place. 12. Work collaboratively with decision-makers, stakeholders, and M colleagues with a variety of viewpoints to achieve policy goals. 13. Assess key microeconomic concepts, including supply and demand, markets, taxes and subsidies, public goods and the case for government I intervention. 14. Describe steps and procedures for the planning, implementation and D I,D evaluation of public health programs and interventions. Note: The syllabi for the core courses do not include competencies, but rather a list of learning outcomes for each course.

DRPH Four departments in the School offer the DrPH; however, all DrPH students are required to take the common core outlined the following table. The goals of the core curriculum are to develop students prepared to succeed at the program-specific level, obtain in depth skills in research methodologies and develop leadership qualities. Core competencies and level of development per course are provided in the table. These competencies were developed by the DrPH curriculum committee and are reviewed annually. Note: PUBH 8404 through PUBH 8412 are track-specific Seminars that are only taken by the DrPH students in that track. Therefore students only register for two of these eight courses. The other nine courses are taken by all DrPH students. A list of course numbers and names are shown in the following tables:

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 127

Table 2.6.a.3: DrPH Core Curriculum and Competencies Course Number Course credits Course Name PubH 8401 3 Foundations of PH Leadership & Practice (Seminar) PubH 8402 2 Leadership in Public Health Practice & Policy PubH 8404 3 Advanced Topics – Health Systems & Health Policy Research PubH 8405 3 Advanced Health Economics Research PubH 8406 3 Advanced Topics – Health Research/Global Health PubH 8407 3 Advanced Topics – Health Leadership/Internt’l Settings PubH 8409 3 Advanced Topics – Health Comm Research PubH 8411 3 Advanced Topics – Principles of Human Health Risk Science PubH 8412 3 Advanced Topics – EOH Research and Practice PubH 8416 3 Study Design & Evaluation Methods PubH 8417 3 Qualitative Research Methods & Analysis PubH 8418 3 Applied Statistical Analysis PubH 8419 3 Measurement in PH & Health Services Research PubH 8420 3 Advanced Analysis & Dissemination PubH 8422 2 Advanced Health Care & PH Research Design PubH 8423 1 -12 Dissertation Research

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 128

I=Introduced D=Developed M= Mastered PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH PUBH 8401 8402 8404 8405 8406 8407 8408 8409 8411 8412 8416 8417 8418 8419 8420 8422 8423 DrPH Core Competencies Analyze a public health problem and determine appropriate sources of data and methods for problem identification, program D D D M M M D D D D D M M planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Develop and analyze hypotheses and research propositions that can be tested by appropriate quantitative or qualitative research D D D M M M D D D D D M M designs and methodologies. Evaluate research tools including research design, statistical analysis data collection instruments and measurement systems. D D D D D D D D D D M M

Apply epidemiological and biostatistical techniques to studies designed to assure effective practice and policy decision-making in a field within public health. Students will possess epidemiological and biostatistical concepts/techniques necessary to successfully D D D D M M analyze and apply the results to epidemiological research to making and implementing complex decisions in a field within public health and related to public health practice. Design and conduct a qualitative study using appropriate theory D and methods. Synthesize and evaluate research conducted by others. I M I D D M M D M M M Design strategies to accurately and effectively describe public health, economic, administrative, legal, social, political, and I D D D D M D D I D D D D D D M cultural implications of different health policy options. Present public health data and research syntheses to scientific D M D D M I I I D D D D D M and professional audiences and the public. Defend the feasibility and expected outcomes of different policy options and transform them into organizations, plans, processes, I D D D D M D M and programs. Appraise the dynamic forces that contribute to cultural diversity I D D D I D D and develop responsive plans and programs. Assess the determinants of health and illness, factors that contribute to health promotion and disease prevention, and factors D D D D D M D M D M that influence the use and cost of public health services in a population. Describe the theory of organizational structure and its relation to D D I professional practice. Support a culture of ethical standards of conduct in the research I I D D D D D M D M process and within organizations and communities. Lead a team of diverse professionals reflecting shared values and D M D vision to achieve specific objectives.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 129

Table 2.6.a.4.: Core Competency Charts for other degrees

MHA* Core:

Domain Competency Competency Description Proficiency Level Displays the ability to effectively manage individuals and teams towards achieving Leadership Leading and managing others Evaluation the goals associated with organizational excellence Exhibits the ability to assess their own strengths and weaknesses with the objective Leadership Ability for honest self-assessment Evaluation of continuously capitalizing on strengths and reducing weaknesses Comm & Relationship Exhibits the ability to effectively express ideas and concepts to many different types Speaking to groups Evaluation Management of audiences verbally Comm & Relationship Working in teams Utilizes a set of team-building functions to facilitate effective group behavior Synthesis Management Business Skills and Possesses the ability to utilize decision making processes that leads to the selection of Solving business problems and making decisions Evaluation Knowledge the most optimal course of action from a group of alternatives Business Skills and Demonstrate the ability to plan, organize, and manage resources to bring about the Planning and managing projects Application Knowledge successful completion of specific project goals and objectives Addresses population wellness by evaluating and implementing activities designed to Professionalism Professional and community contribution Synthesis improve the health and wellness of both individuals and populations The ability to effectively manage the time of self and others with the goal of Professionalism Time management Evaluation maximizing organizational effectiveness Demonstrate an understanding of the breadth of healthcare personnel along with Healthcare Knowledge Healthcare personnel Application demographic, employment and salary implications Demonstrate the ability to understand and apply healthcare regulations including Healthcare Knowledge Standards and regulations Application those from governmental and non-governmental agencies and organizations *MHA competency map is provided in the format required by CAHME.

BS, PUBLIC HEALTH I=Introduced D=Developed M= Mastered PUBH PUBH PUBH 1101 PUBH 1102 PUBH 2110 PUBH 2112 PUBH 3130 PUBH 3131 PUBH 3132 PUBH 3133 3135W 4140W Program Specific Competencies Assess the impact of historical, cultural political, environmental, behavioral, and socio-economic I I I D D D D M factors on population/community health and health status. Describe the organization, financing, and delivery I D D D of health services and public health systems.

Describe the underlying biological factors relating to prominent public health issues and discuss how I D D D D D M these factors inform interventions to improve population health. Critically review multiple types of research, develop an understanding of data and research, I I D D I M and develop and evaluate public health interventions based on available evidence. Evaluate policy, behavioral, environmental, and systems options for addressing current public I I D D D D D M health and health care concerns. Communicate public health concepts and analysis I I D D D D D D D M clearly and persuasively. Use an interdisciplinary/integrative approach to I I I I D D M address public health issues.

PUBH 1101: Introduction to Public Health & Health Services PUBH 3131: Epidemiology: Measuring Health and Disease PUBH 1102: History of Public Health PUBH 3132: Health and Environment PUBH 2110: Public Health Biology PUBH 3133: Global Health & Development PUBH 2112: Principles o Health Education and Health Promotion PUBH 3133W: Health Policy PUBH 3130: Health Services Management and Economics PUBH 4140W: Senior Seminar

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 130 Table 2.6.a.4.: Core Competency Charts for other degrees, (continued)

*BS, Exercise Science Core Competencies I=Introduced D=Developed M= Mastered EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS EXNS 1103 1110 1111 2110 2111 2112 2113 2114 2115 2116 3110 4110 Department Core Competetencies Goal 1: To integrate knowledge of the multiple physiologic responses to exercise (work) at the molecular, cellular, and systems levels. a) Students will demonstrate knowledge and understanding of basic concepts of cellular and molecular physiology, human anatomy & I D D D D M D M D physiology, nutrition, and psychology. [Cognitive: levels 1 and 2]. b) Students will demonstrate knowledge and understanding of various physiological and behavioral mechanisms underlying the body’s I D D D D M D adaptation to exercise. [Cognitive: levels 1 and 2]. c) Students will apply this knowledge and understanding in designing exercise programs for improving health, function, and performance I D D M D within specific populations. [Cognitive: level 3]. d) Students will organize and internalize this knowledge and understanding in adopting lifestyle choices that promote health I D D M D M D and wellness. [Affective: levels 4 & 5; Psychomotor: levels 6 &7].

e) Students will be able to evaluate the effect of various exercise challenges (interventions) on both short- and long-term human D D adaptations based on their own work and by critiquing the literature. [Cognitive: level 6]. Goal 2: To develop critical thinking via the process of scientific inquiry and its translation into human health and function. To integrate knowledge of the multiple physiologic responses to exercise (work) at the molecular, cellular, and systems levels. a) Students will demonstrate knowledge and understanding of basic I D D M research and statistical methods. [Cognitive: levels 1 and 2]. b) Students will be able to interpret descriptive data, as well as basic findings from experimental and from observational studies. [Cognitive: I D M level 2]. c) Students will synthesize this knowledge and understanding by I M designing studies to test specific hypotheses. [Cognitive: level 5]. d) Students will evaluate and critique the current scientific literature for quality of evidence and for relevance to theory and practice. I D D M [Cognitive: level 6]. Goal 3: To develop effective oral and written communication skills, as well as ethical and complex decision making abilities. a) Students will demonstrate the ability to separate complex scientific concepts into components in order to communicate effectively with D D M M different lay audiences in the community. [Cognitive: level 4]. b) Students will demonstrate the ability to synthesize (build) & defend an argument based on diverse elements. [Cognitive: levels 5 & 6]. I D c) Students will organize and defend a comprehensive thesis or project M based on sound evidence and theory. [Cognitive: levels 5 and 6]. d) Students will apply ethical principles to case studies and to real-life experiences and issues presented in their courses and in their D M practica/internships. [Cognitive: level 3; Affective: levels 3 and 4]. e) Students will understand and apply basic skills of career I M development. Goal 4: To engage in practical learning experiences in order to facilitate the translation and application of exercise science and nutrition science to the community. a) Students will integrate scientific theory and principles through I D D D D M D M laboratory and community-based experiences. [Cognitive: levels 4&5]. b) Students will successfully complete a practical experience (or internship) within a public or private sector of industry, government, or M community. [Affective: levels 3 & 4]. c) Students will create a product (e.g., thesis, training manual; curriculum; web site) for use in promoting some aspect of health, M function, or performance among the community. [Cognitive: level 5].

EXNS 1103: Professional Foudnations in Exercise Science ESNS 2115: Nutrition Sciences II EXNS 1110: Applied Anatomy Physiology I EXNS 2116: Exercise and Health Psychology EXNS 1111: Applied Anatomy Physiology II EXNS 3110: Internship EXNS 2110: Prevention & Care of Injury EXNS 4110: Current Issues in Exercise Science EXNS 2111: Exercise Physiology I EXNS 3121: Medical Issues in Sports Medicine EXNS 2113: Kinesiology EXNS 3125: Athletic Training Practicum EXNS 2114: Nutrition Sciences I

*Note- the BS, Exercise Science is currently being revised to comply with new General Education Requirements at the University level. See Criteria 2.10 for additional explanation.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 131

2.6.b. Identification of a set of competencies for each concentration, major or specialization (depending on the terminology used by the school) identified in the instructional matrix. The school must identify competencies for all degrees, including graduate public health professional degrees, graduate academic degrees, graduate other professional degrees, as well as baccalaureate public health degrees and other bachelor’s degrees.

Over the past three years, Dean DeLoia has provided faculty training and guidance on the development of competencies related to program mission, vision and values and to student learning outcomes. Competency charts for each specific program are available in ERF 2.6.1.: Curricular Maps: Program- Specific. Where departments offer multiple tracks for a degree, we have included department-specific competencies.

2.6.c. A matrix that identifies the learning experiences (e.g. Specific course or activity within a course, practicum, culminating experience or other degree requirement) by which the competencies defined in Criteria 2.6.a and 2.6.b. are met. If these are common across the school, a single matrix for each degree will suffice. If they vary, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each degree and concentration. See CEPH Data Template 2.6.1.

CEPH Data Template 2.6.1, outlining competencies by program, is provided as indicated above (see 2.6.b). The syllabi for required coursework include specific learning outcomes mapped to each applicable competency. Syllabi are included in ERF 2.6.c.: Syllabi: Required Courses. The Schedule of classes for the last three academic years is also included in ERF 2.6.c.: Schedule of Classes.

2.6.d. An analysis of the completed matrix included in Criterion 2.6.c. If changes have been made in the curricula as a result of the observations and analysis, such changes should be described.

Over the past several years, program directors and other faculty have been meeting to review curricula and develop curricular maps for all degree programs. As a result, every program now has a detailed curricular map, with competencies and learning objectives detailed, as well as the level to which a concept is explored (introduce, develop or master). We have also changed the syllabus template used for the School, so that all required course syllabi must include learning objectives mapped to the program competencies.

Review of the core is under the domain of the School’s Curriculum Committee. In summer 2012, we created working groups to evaluate the MPH core. As a result of these groups, we deleted two two- credit core classes; PUBH 6005 (Policy Approaches to Public Health) and PUBH 6008 (Management Approaches to Public Health) and added PUBH 6006, a new, three-credit course (Management and Policy Approaches). This course is currently being reviewed by the Department of Health Policy and Management’s Curriculum Committee. This past year we have had three working groups evaluating the following criteria: 1) qualitative methods requirements; 2) quantitative methods courses; and 3) undergraduate offerings.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 132 In short, curricular review and revision is an ongoing and continuous process. Each department and the School have a curriculum committee that routinely reviews course offerings, course evaluations and programmatic objectives and competencies. As needed, we add ad hoc working groups to focus on specific topics (as noted above).

An example of an ad hoc group is the MPH@GW advisory committee. This group was formed when we decided to launch the online program, which spans all departments. This group met throughout the first two years of the program to help design curricular goals, discuss faculty resource issues and help develop the practicum and culminating experiences. Now that we have an Assistant Dean for MPH programs, this group will be dissolved and be replaced with a permanent standing committee for the MPH program that was approved by the Faculty Assembly in September, 2015. There are currently no other education-focused ad hoc committees.

2.6.e. Description of the manner in which competencies are developed, used and made available to students.

MPH Core Competencies The MPH core has traditionally been under the domain of the School-wide Curriculum Committee, which is charged with periodic review of the core classes and the core content. In addition to these periodic reviews, the Curriculum Committee also responds to workforce needs in the field and implements curricula changes accordingly. Moreover, the entire MPH core was reviewed by seven independent working groups in 2013. The results of this review were to: 1) to combine two two-credit courses into one three-credit course, thus opening up an additional credit for elective coursework; and 2) to change the focus of PUBH 6001 (Biological Basis of Disease) to include more depth in the major determinants of health in the developed and developing worlds. Starting in fall of 2015, the new Assistant Dean of MPH Programs will oversee an MPH advisory group, which will assume responsibility for the core and submit any requested revisions to the school-wide curriculum committee, thus providing another layer of consistent review for the MPH core courses.

Program-specific Competencies Competencies for each program were developed over the past two academic years at the program or department level. Prior to this, programs did not have a curricular map. The Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs conducted multiple workshops for program directors and departmental curriculum committees regarding how to develop Mission, Vision, Values and Competencies for the various MPH tracks. Following these workshops, the departmental Curriculum Committees then developed the competencies and curriculum maps for each program. Once developed, the school-wide Curriculum Committee updated the syllabus template to include everything from mapping of each core and program-specific course-learning objective to programmatic competencies. For programs not housed in a single department, working groups developed the competencies and curriculum maps. Now

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 133 that the curriculum maps and competencies are developed, departmental curriculum committees review on an annual basis.

Each department has a curriculum committee that reviews the programmatic level curriculum, conducts curricular mapping, and review. All departments also have monthly faculty meetings to discuss general business and end of the school year curriculum review. In addition, there is an undergraduate committee for the BS, Public Health program and another for the BS, Exercise Science programs.

Once every five-to-seven years, each department undertakes a major self-study review, which consists of: 1) a year long process of departmental review and writing a self-study document; 2) review by an external review committee, including a written report of findings and suggestions; 3) departmental written response to the site visitors report; and 4) Dean’s comments and full report presented to the Provost.

All program descriptions (program guides), with stated competencies, are available to students through our website.

2.6.f. Description of the manner in which the school periodically assesses changing practice or research needs and uses this information to establish the competencies for its educational programs.

Members of the school are actively engaged in ASPPH activities, dean’s retreats, working groups, etc. to stay informed of trends in public health practice and education. Significant ASPPH reports are discussed with school leadership to determine our response. The school has a research committee that meets monthly to advise the dean on research resources, faculty development and any challenges. The Executive Advisory Committee meets monthly to discuss important matters affecting the school.

2.6.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Every program and track has a detailed curricular map. • There are many levels of programmatic and curricular review. • We have established collaborative and inclusive processes for review and strategic planning. • Descriptions of competencies are easily available to both students and faculty. • Competencies and curriculum are informed by professional and academic standards of professional organizations.

Challenges: • Changing the culture of departmentally driven MPH tracks to a more integrated, school-wide approach to the MPH degree.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 134 Future Plans: • Consider and implement working group proposals for improvements to the qualitative and quantitative methods offerings and sequencing. • Re-evaluate the core curriculum in light of the new ASPPH framing documents. • Continue to refine the curricular maps for individual programs.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 135 2.7 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES. THERE SHALL BE PROCEDURES FOR ASSESSING AND DOCUMENTING THE EXTENT TO WHICH EACH PROFESSSIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH, OTHER PROFESSIONAL AND ACADEMIC DEGREE STUDENT HAS DEMONSTRATED ACHIEVEMENT OF THE COMPETENCIES DEFINED FOR HIS OR HER DEGREE PROGRAM AND AREA OF CONCENTRATION.

2.7.a Description of the procedures used for monitoring and evaluating student progress in achieving the expected competencies, including procedures for identifying competency attainment in practice or research, as applicable, and in culminating experiences.

Each course includes one or more elements to monitor and evaluate student progress:

• Written examinations that test both fundamental knowledge and ability to deduce, compute and apply; • Written products, such as policy briefs, literature reviews, library research, needs assessments, and/or funding applications; • Oral presentations; • Group work; and/or • Peer evaluation.

All assignments that are used to monitor and evaluate student progress must include a rubric that describes how the work will be evaluated. See the ERF’s in 2.5.a., 2.9.d., and 2.11.c. to find capstone/CE syllabi, rubrics and student sample work for each program.

Undergraduate PH Assessment

The culminating assessment is achieved through PubH 4140W, the senior seminar. The major deliverables for this course are a memo/presentation, homework assignments (including writing assignments and budget exercises) and a final project and presentation. More detail is provided in Criteria 2.9.d.

MPH

Practice competencies are ascertained by evaluations completed by students, preceptors and faculty members as detailed in Criteria 2.4. The CE assessment is critical to our assessment of student attainment of program competencies. Find the materials for the CE in the ERF: 2.5.a. We require that each program provide details about how students will be assessed and when appropriate, include a grading rubric. Given the broad range of competencies, we have tried to provide some choice for students as to how they choose to demonstrate achievement. Options for CE include original research (data collection and analysis), secondary data collection and analysis, policy analysis, meta analysis, literature review, or white papers. In all of these activities, students must demonstrate proficiency in the relevant competency. Final products for faculty evaluation include research papers, written proposals or

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 136 analyses, concept papers, oral presentations and policy memos. All of the CE courses require more than one of these deliverables.

MS

The MS, Epidemiology and Health Policy students complete a thesis project to demonstrate program competencies. The Public Health Microbiology and Emerging Infectious Disease program requires students to complete epidemiologic or public health laboratory research and write a concept paper, proposal and final report. They are also required to present their work orally to the faculty for evaluation. In the MS, Exercise Science program, students complete a six-credit internship and must pass comprehensive examinations.

Doctoral

The CE for doctoral students is obviously their thesis, which should be mature enough for peer-reviewed publication. PhD and DrPH students must also successfully complete comprehensive exams before becoming eligible for doctoral candidacy. For DrPH students, sufficient progress must be shown in the development of the dissertation proposal in PUBH 8422- Advanced Healthcare and Public Health Research Design before permission is granted to begin the dissertation work. This course prepares students to embark on their independent scholarship.

2.7.b. Identification of outcomes that serve as measures by which the school will evaluate student achievement in each program, and presentation of data assessing the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. Outcome measures must include degree completion and job placement rates for all degrees (including bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees) for each of the last three years. See CEPH Data Template 2.7.1 and 2.7.2. If degree completion rates in the maximum time period allowed for degree completion are less than the thresholds defined in this criterion’s interpretive language, an explanation must be provided. If job placement (including pursuit of additional education), within 12 months following award of the degree, includes fewer than 80% of the graduates at any level who can be located, an explanation must be provided.

Template 2.7, showing graduation completion rates, can be found in ERF 2.7.b.: CEPH Data Template 2.7.1. Graduation Rates. Table 2.7.b. below summarizes the SPH graduation rates.

Of note, two DrPH candidates who matriculated in 2008 are finalizing their dissertations and are expected to complete in 2016. This will bring the 2008 cohort graduation rate to over 70% . The 2006 DrPH cohort graduated five of six (83.3%) candidates in an average of 5.6 years.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 137 Table 2.7.b.: Summary of Graduation Rates shown in CEPH Data Template 2.7.1 Graduation Rate Graduation Rate DEGREE Max Time in Program Matriculated 2010-11 Matriculated 2011-12 MPH 4 years 90.4% 80.2% MHSA/MHA 4 years 90.3% 91.7% MS1 4 or 5 years 83.7% 80.0% BS, PH2 6 years 97.3% 100.0%

Graduation Rate Graduation Rate Matriculated 2009-10 Matriculated 2010-11 BS, EXSC3 6 years 50.0% 66.7% Graduation Rate Marticulated 2008 DrPH4 8 years 52.9% 1 MS, Health Policy students have 5 years to complete, other MS programs have 4 years to complete. 2 BS, PH students matriculate to PH program in Junior year. 2012-13 and 2013-14 cohorts have already graduated 100% of the students in these cohorts. 3 BS, Exercise Science students can matriculate as entering Freshman, however SPH is not responsible for Admissions. With a high percentage of freshman changing majors or withdrawing, these graduation rates are not representative of the graduation rate in this program for students who stay with this major. There are no BS, ES students from the 2009-10 cohort remaining in the program. Two students from the 2010-11 students are continuing to complete degree requirements. 4 DrPH students matriculated in 2008 have 8 years to complete. The 2 remaining candidates are expected to complete in 2016. Maximum time in program has changed to 7 years for students matriculating fall 2014 and thereafter. Admissions for DrPH program is in even number years only.

Employment rates post-graduation We have tried multiple mechanisms to collect alumni employment data including graduation surveys, alumni surveys, the ASPPH survey, and most recently, through social media. The alumni data that we have collected has been consistent, with employment rates generally over 70%. CEPH Data Template 2.7.2 below represents our most complete data set. See Criteria 2.7.c. for further explanation regarding the collection of this data.

CEPH Data Template 2.7.2.: SPH Alumni Employment by Degree Program Destination of Overall Graduates AY 2011/2012 AY 2012/2013 AY 2013/2014 Employed 71% 76% (322/425) 74% (273/370) (263/369) Continuing education/training (not employed) 2% (8/369) 3% (13/425) 4% (16/37) Actively seeking employment Not seeking employment (not employed and not 1% (1/425) continuing education/training, by choice) Unknown 27% (98/369) 20% (89/425) 22% (81/370) Total 100% (369) 100% (425) 100% (370)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 138

CEPH Data Template 2.7.2.: SPH Alumni Employment by Degree Program, (continued) Destination of BS Graduates AY 2011/2012 AY 2012/2013 AY 2013/2014 Employed 64% (32/50) 58% (35/62) 56% (31/55) Continuing education/training (not employed) 4% (2/50) 10% (6/62) 15% (8/55) Actively seeking employment Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) Unknown 32% (16/50) 34% (21/62) 29% (16/55) Total 100% (50) 100% (62) 100% (55)

Destination of MPH Graduates AY AY 2012/2013 AY 2011/2012 2013/2014 Employed 72% 82% (243/296) 78% (186/257) (202/260) Continuing education/training (not employed) 2% (4/257) 4% (4/296) 2% (7/260) Actively seeking employment Not seeking employment (not employed and not 1% (1/296) continuing education/training, by choice) Unknown 26% 16% (48/296) 20% (67/257) (51/260) Total 100% (257) 100% (296) 100% (260)

Destination of MS Graduates AY 2011/2012 AY 2012/2013 AY 2013/2014 Employed 60% 61% (19/31) 67% (16/24) (21/35) Continuing education/training (not employed) 9% (3/35) 10% (3/31) 4% (1/24) Actively seeking employment Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) Unknown 31% (11/35) 29% (9/31) 29% (7/24) Total 100% (35) 100% (31) 100% (24)

Destination of MHA Graduates AY AY 2012/2013 AY 2013/2014 2011/2012 Employed 82% (18/22) 68% (19/28) 75% (18/24) Continuing education/training (not employed) Actively seeking employment Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) Unknown 18% (4/22) 32% (9/28) 25% (6/24) Total 100% (22) 100% (28) 100% (24)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 139 CEPH Data Template 2.7.2.: SPH Alumni Employment by Degree Program, (continued) Destination of DrPH Graduates AY AY AY 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 Employed 100% (5/5) 75% 83% (6/8) (5/6)

Continuing education/training (not employed)

Actively seeking employment

Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice)

Unknown 25% 17% (2/8) (1/6) Total 100% 100% 100% (5) (8) (6)

Destination of PhD Graduates AY AY AY 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 Employed -- -- 100% (1/1)

Continuing education/training (not employed) -- --

Actively seeking employment -- --

Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing -- -- education/training, by choice)

Unknown -- -- Total -- -- 100% (1/1) *Report is based on the Academic Year as follows: Academic Year 2011-2012 to include; Fall 2011, Spring 2012, & Summer 2012. Academic Year 2012-2013 to include; Fall 2012, Spring 2013, & Summer 2013. Academic Year 2013-2014 to include; Fall 2013, Spring 2014, & Summer 2014.

**Academic Year 2013-2014: MS Graduate total is 25 students, however, one alumna passed away. Therefore, our total for reporting purposes is 24.

ASPPH Survey This past year, the SPH participated in the ASPPH pilot graduate employment survey. We had 39.9% (128) students respond to the survey. Of these, only four (3.7%) were unemployed and seeking employment; six (5.6%) were in a fellowship/internship/residency, and eight (7.5%) were not seeking employment. The vast majority of those working (88.8%) were working with a new employer after graduation.

While the data we were able to collect indicated acceptable rates of employment, we were missing data on many of our alumni. To attempt to collect better data, we initiated a social media strategy (see 2.7.c).

University Survey

The University also conducts a survey of graduating students who are participating in commencement activities. This survey is distributed early each spring and has a good rate of response. Students who have graduated in summer, fall and spring are all surveyed at the same time, once each academic year.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 140 Below is a summary of employment data reported by participating graduates students from our School in 2012, 2013, and 2014.

Table 2.7.b.: GW Graduate Student Graduation Survey Response to question about Post Graduation Plans for SPH Students 2012 2013 2014 n= 251 275 220 Employed 46% 43%-- 48% Continuing education/training (not employed) 7% 4% 5% Actively seeking employment 33% 45% 40% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by 5% 5% 2% choice) Unknown 9% 3% 5% Total 100% 100% 100%

2.7.c. An explanation of the methods used to collect job placement data and of graduates’ response rates of these data collection efforts. The school must list the number of graduates from each degree program and the number of respondents to the graduate survey or other means of collecting employment data.

We have traditionally collected employment data through two sets of student surveys. The first is through the university graduate student graduation survey, administered through the Office of Survey Research and Analysis (Table 2.7.b above). The survey is conducted between mid-March and May each year to students who graduated (or are graduating) in the summer, fall or spring of the current academic year. The response rate for this survey typically varies from 70-80 percent of eligible students. The complete surveys are available in ERF 2.7.b.: GW Graduate Student Graduation Surveys. (The complete GW Undergraduate Senior Survey is also included in ERF 2.7.b.: GW Undergraduate Senior Surveys.) The second is through a School alumni survey that we have been sending out three and six months after graduation. The response rate for our own survey typically is much lower than for the University. Additionally, as noted above, we also participated in the ASPPH survey this past year.

Given the relatively low response rate of alumni after they leave the school, this past summer we hired someone to specifically track our graduates from the past three years. To gather data on the employment status of our graduates for the past three years, we generated a list of alumni that graduated from 2012- 2014. Graduation dates are defined as follows:

• 2012: Fall 2011, Spring 2012, Summer 2012 • 2013: Fall 2012, Spring 2013, Summer 2013 • 2014: Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Summer 2014

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 141 The list was leveraged to utilize LinkedIn and broader internet searches to determine each student’s updated employment status. Through this approach, we found 865 alumni. The remaining 299 unknown graduates from this three year period were then surveyed through the GWork for Public Health system to determine their current employment status. Through this survey we were able to gather information on an additional 31 alumni. Of the 1,164 students searched and surveyed, we were able to identify employment information for 896 (77%). (Data presented in CEPH Data Template 2.7.2 above.)

2.7.d. In fields for which there is certification of professional competence and data are available from the certifying agency, data on the performance of the school’s graduates on these national examinations for each of the last three years.

There are two examining bodies for which such data are available: the National Board of Public Health Examiners (NBPHE) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM). As shown in the table below, only eight students and 32 alumni took the NBPHE exam in the last three years. All students and all but three alumni passed.

Table 2.7.d.: NBPHE Exam Results- Milken Institute School of Public Health

# Students # Students # Alumni # Alumni Taking Passing Taking Passing Percent Test Date Exam Exam Exam Exam Pass Rate Jun-15 0 0 2 1 50% Feb-15 0 0 0 0 N/A Oct-14 1 1 5 5 100% Feb-14 2 2 4 4 100% Oct-13 0 0 2 2 100% Feb-13 4 4 4 3 87.5% Oct -12 1 1 2 2 100.0% Feb-12 0 0 12 11 92%

Students in the MS, Clinical Exercise Physiology program are required to take the ACSM Certificate exam in exercise physiology. Since 2011, 23 of 24 students have passed the exam.

2.7.e. Data and analysis regarding the ability of the school’s graduates to perform competencies in an employment setting, including information from periodic assessments of alumni, employers and other relevant stakeholders. Methods for such assessments may include key informant interviews, surveys, focus groups and documented discussions.

We collect this information from both preceptors and employers. From our preceptor surveys, we collect data related to the extent to which students were prepared to perform in their practicum experiences. In the last three years, 99% of our preceptors indicated that our students’ were

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 142 appropriately prepared and they would be willing to host another SPH student. We infer from this that they will also be prepared for performing well in an employment setting.

We are also taking steps to learn more about how our graduates perform on the job. In 2014, the SPH began interviewing employers with multiple SPH graduates. The participants from our first interviews are listed below:

• NACCHO • Live Healthier • Population Services International (PSI) • OSSE/DC Office of the State Superintendent of Education, Wellness and Nutrition Services • Voxiva • Medicare and Medicaid Services • CEPH

Because the initial study was small it was analyzed qualitatively. Recommendations revolved around building communication skills, data analysis skills, and the translation from theory into practice. This information was conveyed to the School’s Curriculum Committee, which was instructed to share relevant points with their departmental faculty.

In 2015, the SPH Career Services department administered a survey to employers who had posted a position within our GWork for Public Health jobs database system. The survey was distributed to the “primary contacts” in our GWork for Public Health database. Five responses were received, of which only two indicated they had actually hired SPH students in the past three years, telling us that not all of our “primary contacts” in the university-wide employer tracking system were familiar with our SPH students. Since then, remedies were identified to connect with more viable contacts within the employer organizations. Additionally, based on this knowledge rate, we have qualified our alumni employment data to identify the top 20 employers of SPH graduates in the past three years. The SPH plans to specifically target these employers in the future, both by administering an annual Employer Survey, and by qualifying these employer’s experiences with our students after predefined criteria have been met, including; a) a job posting has expired (they will have had an opportunity to review any applications from SPH students; and b) after any meaningful on-campus engagement (Career Fair, Information Session, Recruiting event, etc.).

In addition to capturing information about our graduates’ overall performance, we have solicited employer feedback about their willingness to hire from our programs, as well as their suggestions in regard to our student’s strengths and weaknesses. We have also qualified the employers “industry category”, using standards published by LinkedIn, to gather information on broader industry demands and expectations based on the feedback from employers. These trends will allow us to keep an active pulse on the job market and to relay that information to our students, alumni, faculty and staff in collective efforts to prepare them for long term professional success.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 143 We anticipate our response rate will improve going forward, by connecting specifically with the contact person within the organizations that post positions in the GWork for Public Health system, or attends a Career Fair, on-campus recruiting event, or has directly engaged with SPH students. By targeting these points of contact, the SPH expects to improve its data collection efforts and further conduct evaluation of our programs.

The MHA program, which has been in existence for more than 50 years, tracks job titles of alumni. Of the approximately 3,500 alumni we are able to track, >2,400 had C suite titles, an indicator of their high level of competency and accomplishments in the health management workforce.

2.7.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Students are judged to be well prepared for the practicum experience, an indirect indication that they have become competent in their knowledge of public health. • Job placement rates are strong. • Most of our undergraduates continue graduate or professional education. • Majority of our MHA graduates are in significant leadership positions.

Challenges: • Difficulty obtaining high response rate to surveys, especially for alumni. • Difficulty tracking alumni.

Future plans: • All students will sign up on LinkedIn before graduating. • Continue and expand outreach to employers through interviews and surveys. • Qualify student’s knowledge around professional opportunities in public health at three critical points: 1) upon entry (student intake survey); 2) upon completion of the first year; and 3) upon graduation (three and six month surveys). • Continue to leverage GWork for Public Health, where students and alumni can proactively update their employment status.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 144 2.8 OTHER GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREES. IF THE SCHOOL OFFERS CURRICULA FOR GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREES OTHER THAN THE MPH OR EQUIVALENT PUBLIC HEALTH DEGREES, STUDENTS PURSUING THEM MUST BE GROUNDED IN BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH KNOWLEDGE.

2.8.a. Identification of professional degree curricula offered by the school, other than those preparing primarily for public health careers, and a description of the requirements for each.

The Masters of Health Administration The MHA Program has been in continuous accreditation since 1968 (ACEHSA/CAHME) and is housed in the Department of Health Policy and Management (HPM). The Program enrolls full- and part-time students and prepares them for the challenges of delivering quality health services: dealing with trends in service delivery, managing financial resources, focusing on patient safety and quality and improving performance to ensure timely delivery of efficacious health services to individuals and communities.

The program was founded in 1959 as the Program in Hospital Administration in the School of Business. Since then the program has undergone a number of major transformations, most recently, as an MHA with a curriculum responsive to the fast-paced and dynamic changes in health care and the health services field. Over several years the program was enhanced by adding emphases on management of long-term and post-acute care management and ambulatory care, in addition to traditional hospital care. Most recently, we further improved the program by adding: a semester-long elective in emergency and disaster management; several short (three-day long) electives taught by either program alumni or seasoned healthcare executives; a semi-annual program newsletter; a number of new residency sites; and several new faculty, including, regular, full-time faculty, several full-time visiting faculty and a number of new professorial lecturers. This fall we are conducting a nationwide search for two additional special service faculty, who will be committed to significant teaching and mentoring.

The program is distinguished by: 1) a required one-year, full-time administrative Residency for the Program’s management areas of focus, for nine-semester hours; 2) voluntary community service activities in conjunction with medical, nursing, physician assistant, physical therapy, and public health students; 3) affiliation with The George Washington University Hospital and the George Washington Medical Faculty Associates, a large physician group practice; 4) alumni mentoring and alumni assistance in career development and placement through the Student Alumni Mentoring Program (SAMP); 5) executives-in-residence (EIR) who we bring to campus to teach, mentor, and counsel students; and 6) faculty support to an active student association offering a wide variety of professional development, social activities and affiliations with local and national professional associations.

CAHME reaccredited the MHA program in 2013 for 7 years. It is also accredited by the National Association of Board of Long Term Care (NAB). NAB accredits program for long-term care administrators; with that accreditation, GW MHA graduates are permitted to apply for a license in twenty eight states.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 145 The MHA is a 50-credit program. The curricular requirements are shown in the table below. Students also enroll in between 10 and 16 credits of pre-approved electives, depending on if they choose the Internship or Residency option for field experience.

Table 2.8.a.: MHA Required Curriculum Required Courses (31 credits) Course Credits Title HSML 6202 2 Introduction to the US Health Care System HSML 6203 2 Introduction to Health Management HSML 6204 2 Quality and Performance Improvement HSML 6206 3 Quantitative Methods and Epidemiology in Health Services HSML 6207 2 Health Services Information Applications HSML 6208 2 Medical Informatics HSML 6209 2 Health Services Finance HSML 6210 2 Health Services Financial Applications HSML 6211 2 Health Economics HSML 6212 2 Community Health Management Advocacy HSML 6213 2 Health Services Marketing and Planning HSML 6215 2 Health Law for Managers HSML 6216 2 Human Resources Management and Organizational Behavior HSML 6218 2 Seminar in Health Services Management and Leadership PubH 6004 2 Environmental and Occupational Health in a Sustainable World

Field Experience (3 or 9 Credits) HSML 6273-6275 9 Residency Focus Area Options: Acute and Ambulatory Care Management; Post-acute Care Management (including Long Term Care) HSML 6271 3 Internship Focus Area Options: Information Systems and Financial Management; Operations management; Strategic Management and Policy

2.8.b. Identification of the manner in which these curricula assure that students acquire a public health orientation. If this means is common across these other professional degree programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by program, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each program.

In response to the CEPH site visit in 2007, the MHA requirements relative to the public health core were revised and strengthened. Within the 50-credit graduation requirement, we have three additional requirements:

• A two-credit environmental health course – PUBH 6004, Environmental and Occupational Health in a Sustainable World. This core course is taught by our EOH faculty for all of our master’s students. • Quantitative Methods and Epidemiology in Health Services, HSML 6206. The course content was reviewed with and approved by faculty from the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. • Community Health Management and Advocacy, HSML 6212. This course was developed collaboratively with the Department of Prevention and Community Health. • The two new courses that we added (HSML 6206 and 6212) were approved by the School’s Curriculum Committee as meeting identified competencies in the core areas.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 146

2.8.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Addition of three required courses to provide a sounder foundation in public health.

Challenges: • None

Future Plans: • While MHA students receive adequate introduction to core public health knowledge, they might be better served by taking these core courses outside the department, so as to broaden their perspectives about other disciplines. We will evaluate this option. • The Department of Health Policy and Management Curriculum Committee is evaluating ways to better integrate the MPH and MHA curricula.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 147 2.9 BACHELOR’S DEGREES IN PUBLIC HEALTH. IF THE SCHOOL OFFERS BACCALAUREATE PUBLIC HEALTH DEGREES, THEY SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS:

1. REQUIRED COURSEWORK IN PUBLIC HEALTH CORE KNOWLEDGE: STUDENTS MUST COMPLETE COURSES THAT PROVIDE A BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE FIVE CORE PUBLIC HEALTH KNOWLEDGE AREAS DEFINED IN CRITERION 2.1, INCLUDING ONE COURSE THAT FOCUSES ON EPIDEMIOLOGY. COLLECTIVELY, THIS COURSEWORK SHOULD BE AT LEAST THE EQUIVALENT OF 12 SEMESTER-CREDIT HOURS. 2. ELECTIVE PUBLIC HEALTH COURSEWORK: IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEALTH CORE KNOWLEDGE COURSES, STUDENTS MUST COMPLETE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH-RELATED COURSES. PUBLIC HEALTH-RELATED COURSES MAY INCLUDE THOSE ADDRESSING SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, QUANTITATIVE, GEOGRAPHIC, EDUCATIONAL AND OTHER ISSUES THAT IMPACT THE HEALTH OF POPULATIONS AND HEALTH DISPARITIES WITHIN AND ACROSS POPULATIONS. 3. CAPSTONE EXPERIENCE: STUDENTS MUST COMPLETE AN EXPERIENCE THAT PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES TO APPLY PUBLIC HEALTH PRINCIPLES OUTSIDE OF A TYPICAL CLASSROOM SETTING AND BUILDS ON PUBLIC HEALTH COURSEWORK. THIS EXPERIENCE SHOULD BE AT LEAST EQUIVALENT TO THREE SEMESTER-CREDIT HOURS OR SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE TYPICAL CAPSTONE REQUIREMENT FOR A BACHELOR’S DEGREE TO THE PARENT UNIVERSITY. THE EXPERIENCE MAY BE TAILORED TO STUDENTS’ EXPECTED POST-BACCALAUREATE GOALS (EG, GRADUATE AND/OR PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL, ENTRY-LEVEL EMPLOYMENT), AND A VARIETY OF EXPERIENCES THAT MEET UNIVERSITY REQUIREMENTS MAY BE APPROPRIATE. ACCEPTABLE CAPSTONE EXPERIENCES MIGHT INCLUDE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: INTERNSHIP, SERVICE-LEARNING PROJECT, SENIOR SEMINAR, PORTFOLIO PROJECT, RESEARCH PAPER OR HONORS THESIS. 4. THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEALTH CORE COURSEWORK AND CAPSTONE EXPERIENCE MUST BE TAUGHT (IN THE CASE OF COURSEWORK) AND SUPERVISED (IN THE CASE OF CAPSTONE EXPERIENCES) BY FACULTY DOCUMENTED IN CRITERIA 4.1.A AND 4.1.B.

2.9.a. Identification of all bachelor’s-level majors offered by the school. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

See Instructional Matrix in Criteria 2.1.a.

The BS, Public Health is a generalist degree providing undergraduate students a basic liberal arts education with a broad overview of the public health core. The program introduces basic tools, methods and approaches used in public health practice; reflects on the challenges of the field; addresses current topics and trends; and engages students in practical application of skills taught throughout the curriculum. GW’s BS Public Health program has been a leader in the field (ranked 6th nationally by College Factual) and complies with 2012 ASPPH recommendations for the undergraduate major in public health.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 148 2.9.b. Description of specific support and resources available in the school for the bachelor’s degree programs.

The Program Director, Sara Wilensky, JD, PhD is a Special Services Faculty for Undergraduate Education and is based in the Department of Health Policy and Management. Dr. Wilensky is responsible for the overall direction, budgeting, faculty participation, and oversight for the Public Health major, Public Health minor, and the five-year BS/MPH program.

An Undergraduate Program Advisor (staff position) is responsible for managing the program content and working closely with prospective and current students in the major, minor, and five-year BS/MPH program. This position advises students regarding course selection, degree requirements, and overall academic planning. In addition, students have access to DegreeMAP, the GW on-line program that allows students to follow their progress and degree requirements.

The Undergraduate Curriculum Subcommittee of the SPH Curriculum Committee includes representatives from each SPH department as well as the Program Director, Program Advisor (non- voting), the Assistant Dean of Student Affairs (non-voting) and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (non-voting). The subcommittee provides guidance for overall program goals and curriculum direction, approves new courses, evaluates existing course work, and establishes curriculum-related policies (e.g., which courses are approved as electives).

The SPH Student Affairs office is available for assistance to undergraduate students on an as-needed basis to complete special projects and handle student issues that present exceptions to the usual course of business. An admissions representative within the SPH Office of Admissions and Recruitment provides logistical assistance during the admissions process and the Undergraduate Advisor maintains the student list serves.

Two class representatives act as liaisons between the students and the Program Director and assist with special projects, such as class surveys. Two representatives bring an undergraduate presence to the GW Public Health Students’ Association (PHSA). PHSA is a student and alumni-run organization that plans social, academic, and career-enhancing events throughout the school and in the community. PHSA’s faculty advisor is Dr. Loretta DiPietro, Chair of the Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences.

Undergraduate students have access to all of the resources of the school and university. The new SPH building, on our Foggy Bottom campus in downtown DC, provides a place for all undergraduate and graduate public health students to take classes, study, and socialize. Many of our undergraduate students take advantage of our Washington, DC location by working and volunteering outside the university, as well as participating in local events and conferences.

2.9.c. Identification of required and elective public health courses for the bachelor’s degree(s). Note: The school must demonstrate in Criterion 2.6.c that courses are connected to identified competencies (ie, required and elective public health courses must be listed in the competency matrix in Criterion 2.6.d.)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 149 Students enter GW as freshman with an undeclared major and then apply to the SPH in their sophomore year. Historically, students were only admitted to matriculate in the first semester of their junior year. However, in the fall of 2015, a second admissions cycle was implemented to begin admitting students to matriculate in the second semester of their sophomore year. Applicants must have at least a 3.0 GPA to be considered for admission and additional consideration is given to student’s overall academic and curricular strengths, writing skills, commitment to public health, leadership and other qualities. Over the last several years, we have had many more applicants than available room in the program leading to the current plan to have two admissions cycles and an increase in the student enrollment.

The tables below provide a list of our required and approved elective courses. The competency matrix can be found in Criteria 2.6.b. As required, our students must complete coursework in the five core public health areas. In addition, students are required to take courses in biology, statistics, and economics as pre-requisites for our required courses. The program maintains a list of approved elective courses within and outside of the public health school. All approved electives have a nexus with public health, even if offered by other schools at the university or outside of the university.

Newly admitted BS, Public Health students matriculating in fall 2015 will follow a slightly revised program (as shown below). One core course, Introduction to Preventive Medicine, has been eliminated in response to feedback from students and the Undergraduate Committee. The core is now 30 credits, down from 33. This change provided the opportunity to add three elective credits to the curriculum so that students can customize the program to their specific field(s) of interest within public health. The current list of approved undergraduate electives is shown in the next table. The complete program guide is available here: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/public-health-bs.

How students are introduced to Biostatistics: All students are required to complete at least one Statistics course as a prerequisite to PUBH 3131- Epidemiology: Measuring Health and Disease. We encourage students to take STAT 1127- Statistics for the Biological Sciences; however, we do not require STAT 1127, since it is only offered in the spring term and not all of our students can fit it into their spring schedules. Because of this limitation other introductory statistics courses are accepted.

• STAT 1127- Statistics for the Biological Sciences. (3 Credits)- Introduction to statistical techniques and reasoning applicable to the biomedical and related sciences. Properties of basic probability functions: binomial, Poisson, and normal. Data analysis, inference, and experimental design.

• STAT 1051- Introduction to Business and Economic Statistics. (3 Credits)- Lecture plus laboratory. Frequency distributions, descriptive measures, probability, probability distributions, sampling, estimation, tests of hypotheses, regression and correlation, with applications to business.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 150 • STAT 1053- Introduction to Statistics in Social Science. (3 Credits)- Lecture plus laboratory. Frequency distributions, descriptive measures, probability, sampling, estimation, tests of hypotheses, regression and correlation, with applications to social sciences.

• STAT 1111- Business and Economic Statistics I. (3 Credits)- Descriptive statistics, graphical methods, probability, special distributions, random variables, sampling, estimation and confidence intervals, hypothesis testing, correlation and regression.

Table 2.9.c.1.: BS PH Core Curriculum (30 credits) and Approved Electives (12 credits) Required Courses Credits Course Title PubH 1101 3 Introduction to Public Health and Health Services PubH 1102 3 History of Public Health PubH 2110 3 Public Health Biology PubH 2112 3 Principles of Health Education and Health Promotion PubH 3130 3 Health Services Management and Economics PubH 3131 3 Epidemiology: Measuring Health and Disease PubH 3132 3 Health and Environment PubH 3133 3 Global Health and Development PubH 3135-W 3 Health Policy PubH 4140-W 3 Senior Seminar

Elective Courses Credits Course Title HLWL 1106 3 Drug Awareness HLWL 1109 3 Human Sexuality HLWL 1110 3 Issues in Alternative Medicine EXNS 1114 3 Community Nutrition EXNS 2119 3 Basic Nutrition EXNS 2122 3 Food Systems in Public Health HIST 3363 3 Race, American Medicine, and PH: African-American Experiences ANTH 3504 3 Illness, Healing and Culture ANTH 3513 3 Human Rights and Ethics ANTH 6302 3 Issues in Development BIOC 3560 3 Diet, Health, and Longevity GEOG 2137 3 Environmental Hazards HSCI 2101 3 Psychosocial Aspects of Health and Illness ORSC 4161 3 Organizational Research Methods PSC 2101 3 Scope & Methods in Political Science PSYC 2101 3 Research Methods - Psychology PubH 1099 1-3 Variable Topics PubH 2113 3 Impact of Culture Upon Health PubH 2114 3 Environment, Health and Development PubH 2115 3 Health, Human Rights, and Displaced Persons PubH 2116 3 Global Delivery of Health Services PubH 2117 3 Service-Learning in Public Health PubH 3136 3 Health Law PubH 3137 3 Global Public Health Nutrition PubH 3150 3 Sustainable Energy and Environmental Health PubH 3151 3 Current Issues in Bioethics PubH 3190 1-3 Various Topics in Public Health

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 151 2.9.d. A description of school policies and procedures regarding the capstone experience.

The capstone experience is designed as a Senior Seminar involving the development of an extensive research proposal or public health program design. Students are encouraged to complete as many required courses, all if possible, before enrolling in the Senior Seminar. Advising is available to assist students in selecting which requirements would be best to take concurrently with the Senior Seminar as it applies content and theory from many of the required courses to the development of the capstone project. (ERF 2.9.d. Senior Seminar Syllabus) Unique to GW, the Senior Seminar is designated as a Writing-in-the-Disciplines course, meaning that students engage in several forms of writing and revision throughout the semester. The final product is a single-spaced, 30-page program proposal that includes an executive summary, budget justification, and literature review, along with the main content of the proposal. In addition, students present proposals to the class at the end of the semester; students vote on which proposal they consider to be worth funding. Examples of undergraduate student capstones may be found in ERF 2.9.d.: UG Capstone Student Work Samples and Capstone Project Overview.

2.9.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The BSPH major has been a very popular major, both in terms of students’ demand for the major and student evaluations upon graduation. • Students complete the program with broad public health knowledge that prepares them for a wide array of job opportunities. • The major has been highly selective among the GW undergraduate cohort that is, in itself, selective. Over the last several years, the BS, PH cohorts have had an average GPA of 3.6 at the end of their sophomore years. • We also provide a PH minor and a five-year BS/MPH program to allow students to choose the public health program that best fits their academic interests. • The new SPH building has allowed all undergraduate majors to interact with each other, the graduate students, and the faculty and staff more than ever before, providing a new cohesiveness to the program and within the school. • We have excellent faculty teaching in the program. All of our faculty have extensive experience in the field and/or teach in our MPH program. • The school’s recently updated website makes it easier for students to learn about our programs.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 152 Challenges: • Until our move into the new building, space constraints forced us to limit enrollment to 60 students in the major at one time. As a result we had to turn away many interested students by capping the numbers in our major and five-year programs. The minor is also very popular and enrollment is limited to 75 per year. • It is difficult to keep up with the demand for undergraduate courses given the competing demands on faculty who also do research and teach graduate students. • The admissions process presents challenges in terms of communicating with students and advisors regarding the opportunities available in our School.

Future Plans: • The school has approval to increase enrollment to 120 students in the BS, PH program over the next several years. As a result, the SPH will expand course and section offerings. • In fall 2015, we will admit students into the program a term earlier to attract more students, now that we have space to expand.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 153 2.10 OTHER BACHELOR’S DEGREES. IF THE SCHOOL OFFERS BACCALAUREATE DEGREES IN FIELDS OTHER THAN PUBLIC HEALTH, STUDENTS PURSUING THEM MUST BE GROUNDED IN BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH KNOWLEDGE.

2.10.a. Identification of other baccalaureate degrees offered by the school and a description of the requirements for each. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

In addition to the BS in Public Health, the SPH offers a BS in Exercise Science (see Instructional Matrix in 2.1.a) with the option of choosing a concentration in:

• Pre-Athletic Training/Sports Medicine • Pre-Medical Professional • Pre-Physical Therapy • Or no concentration

In 2014 the Department of Exercise Science changed its name to Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences (EXNS) to better reflect the growing nutrition content in the curriculum and the importance of nutrition in health promotion and disease prevention. The BS in Exercise Science is housed within the EXNS Department.

All students in the BS Exercise Science major, regardless of concentration, are required to take the University General Education Requirements (GER) which includes University writing requirement courses (http://bulletin.gwu.edu/university-regulations/general-education/); and core courses in exercise and nutrition science. Additional information can be found in the program guides on the SPH website: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics/undergraduate.

2.10.b. Identification of the manner in which these curricula assure that students acquire a public health orientation. If this means is common across these degree programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by program, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each program.

Exercise Science majors are all required to take the same core courses and one of the following Public Health courses to fulfill the university undergraduate General Curriculum Requirements:

1) PUBH 1101-Introduction to Public Health and Health Services [Introduction to aspects of public health and health services, including health services administration and policy, maternal and child health, environmental health, and health promotion.]

Or

2) PUBH 2110-Public Health Biology [Basic scientific mechanisms, concepts, and principles in health and the pathogenesis of diseases; a foundation for applications to public health.]

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 154 The core coursework in Exercise and Nutrition Sciences has a strong thread emphasizing the relationship between physical activity and nutrition with public health concepts of disease prevention. This includes an epidemiologic foundation using supporting evidence to study, implement, and evaluate protocols and programs.

Table 2.10.b.: BS, Exercise Science Core Curriculum

Required Core Classes (41-42 credits) Class Credits Title EXNS 1103 3 Professional Foundations in Exercise Science EXNS 1110 4 Applied Anatomy & Physiology I & Lab EXNS 1111 4 Applied Anatomy & Physiology II & Lab EXNS 2110 4 (3) Prevention and Care of Injury & Lab (No 1 credit lab for Pre-Athletic Training/Sports Med concentration ONLY) EXNS 2111 4 Exercise Physiology I & Lab EXNS 2112 4 Exercise Physiology II & Lab EXNS 2113 4 Kinesiology & Lab EXNS 2114 3 Nutrition Sciences I EXNS 2115 3 Nutrition Sciences II EXNS 2116 3 Exercise and Health Psychology EXNS 3110 3 Internship EXNS 4110 3 Current Issues in Exercise Science

2.10.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The Exercise Science major is an integral and important part of the School. Undergraduate students in this program are well grounded in the connection between exercise/physical activity, nutrition and the prevention of chronic disease. The content of the freshman course Professional Foundations in Exercise Science (EXNS 1103) lays a solid foundation in public health and exercise science and this information is carried through the other course work and field work experiences to the senior capstone course, Current Issues in Exercise Science (PUBH 4110). • The Department of EXNS has an excellent faculty with a variety of expertise and experience. • The Department of EXNS also offers minors in Exercise Science and in Nutrition.

Challenges: • Although we do have a strong public health content integration in the undergraduate Exercise Science major, the connection between undergraduate students in both majors (exercise science and public health) could be improved.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 155 Future Plans: • Review curriculum to accommodate recent changes in the University GERs. The exercise science and public health content thread is currently strong and will continue to be a focus in the curriculum. • Look into expanding the EXNS and PUBH course offerings that cross the two undergraduate majors and integrate additional, appropriate public health content into the Exercise Science major. • In 2014, the EXNS department began to offer an MPH track in Public Health Nutrition with the expectation to expand the undergraduate program options to include a major in Nutritional Sciences. This program will be well grounded in basic public health concepts comparable to the Exercise Science major.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 156 2.11 ACADEMIC DEGREES. IF THE SCHOOL ALSO OFFERS CURRICULA FOR GRADUATE ACADEMIC DEGREES, STUDENTS PURSUING THEM SHALL OBTAIN A BROAD INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC HEALTH, AS WELL AS AN UNDERSTANDING ABOUT HOW THEIR DISCIPLINE-BASED SPECIALIZATION CONTRIBUTES TO ACHIEVING THE GOALS OF PUBLIC HEALTH.

2.11.a Identification of all academic degree programs, by degree and area of specialization. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

See Instructional Matrix in Criterion 2.1.a.

The SPH has four academic MS degree programs:

MS, Health Policy: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/health-policy-ms

MS, Epidemiology: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/epidemiology-ms

MS, Public Health Microbiology & Emerging Infectious Diseases: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/public-health-microbiology-and-emerging-infectious- diseases-ms

MS, Exercise Science- Strength & Conditioning: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/strength-and- conditioning-ms

The SPH has two academic PhD degree programs- See Criteria 2.12. PhD, Epidemiology: https://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/epidemiology-phd

PhD, Social and Behavioral Science in Public Health: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/social-and- behavioral-sciences-phd

2.11.b. Identification of the means by which the school assures that students in academic curricula acquire a public health orientation. If this means is common across the school, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

MS in Health Policy The MS in Health Policy is a 48-credit program housed in the Department of HPM. The goals of the program are to provide students with the skills and knowledge to prepare them to pursue subsequent doctoral study or to enter academic or research careers as analysts in health policy for think tanks, health delivery systems, regulatory and other government agencies, or university settings. The program emphasizes individual study design and allows students to focus their training in a particular area of health policy. The table below outlines the curricular requirements.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 157 Table 2.11.b.1.: MS, Health Policy Curriculum Core Courses Credits PubH 6002 Biostatistical Applications for Public Health 3 PubH 6003 Principles and Practice of Epidemiology 3 PubH 6006 Management and Policy Approaches to Public Health 3 PubH 6242+ 2 Clinical Epidemiology and Decision Analysis + PubH 6243 1 Topics in Clinical Epidemiology and Decision Analysis (lab requirement)

Total SPH Core Course Credits 12 Required Program-Specific Courses Course Credits PUBH 6305 Fundamentals for Health Policy 2 (prerequisite: none) PUBH 6310 Statistical Analysis in Health Policy 3 (prerequisite: PUBH 6002) PUBH 6315 Introduction to Health Policy Analysis 2 (prerequisite: PUBH 6305) Advanced Analysis SELECTIVES (choose one course from list below): PUBH 6320: Advanced Health Policy Analysis 2 (prerequisites: PUBH 6310 and PUBH 6315) PUBH 6247: Design of Health Studies 3 (prerequisites: PUBH 6003, 6310 and 6315) PUBH 6249: Use of Statistical Packages for Data Management and Data Analysis 3 (prerequisites: PUBH 6310 and 6315) PUBH 6411: Global Health Qualitative Research Methods (prerequisites: PUBH 2 6002, 6410) PUBH 6530: Qualitative Methods/Health Promotion 2 PUBH 6501: Evaluation of Health Promotion Disease Prevention Programs 3 (prerequisites: PUBH 6002,6003 and permission of instructor) PUBH 6533: Design of Community Health Surveys 2 PUBH 8417: Qualitative Research Methods and Analysis (prerequisites: 3 instructors permission) PUBH 8419: Measurement in Public Health and Health Services Research 3 (prerequisite: instructors permission) PPPA 6015: Benefit-Cost Analysis 3 (prerequisites: PUBH 6310, 6315, PPPA 6014 or equivalent micro economics course and instructor’s permission) PPPA 6016: Public and Non-profit Program Evaluation 3 (prerequisites: PUBH 6310, 6315 and instructor’s permission) EMSE 6740: Systems Thinking & Policy Modeling I 3 (prerequisites: PUBH 6310 and 6315) PUBH 6330 Health Services and Law (prerequisite: none) 3 OR OR OR PUBH 6335 Public Health and Law (prerequisite: none) 3 PUBH 6340 Health Economics and Financing (prerequisite: PUBH 6352 Basics of Economics 3 or instructor’s permission) PUBH 6345 Health Policy Research Design 2 PUBH 6013 Master’s Thesis 3 Total Program-Specific Course Credits 20/21 Elective Courses Any PUBH or A personalized combination of elective courses (depending 15/16 Please check the applicable semester HSML course on which Selective was taken). Any PUBH or HSML course schedule – elective course course will count as an elective toward the MS in Health offerings are semester-specific.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 158 The MS in health policy requirements include 12 credits of core courses offered at the school level, which provides students with a broad public health orientation while ensuring they have the research skills necessary to conduct rigorous research. These courses include: PUBH 6002, PUBH 6003, PUBH 6006 and PUBH 6242/6243 as shown above.

As part of the program requirements, several of the courses noted in the above table are specifically in the discipline of health policy, which provides them in-depth education in this field. These include each of the courses in the PUBH 6300 series.

Several of the required courses also focus on the theoretical basis for public health and health policy interventions (e.g. health behavior, environmental health, political and policy-making theory) and research skills to meet the required competencies of the MS in Health Policy. These include PUBH 6002, PUBH 6242/6243 and PUBH 6310.

To satisfy the degree requirements, the MS, Health Policy students also take a two-credit Health Policy Research and Design course, in preparation for completing the thesis.

MS in Epidemiology This 33-credit MS program was transferred from the CCAS to the SPH in July 2013. As part of the Department of Epi/Bio, the goals of the MS in Epidemiology are to prepare students for careers as epidemiologists in government, industry or academia and to prepare students who plan to continue their studies in a doctoral program. The program includes coursework focusing on theoretical and applied epidemiological and statistical methods as well as public health. Program requirements are outlined in Table 2.11.b.2 below.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 159 Table 2.11.b.2.: MS, Epidemiology Curricular Requirements

Required Core Courses (22 Total Credits) Required Public Health Core Courses (16 Credits) Credits PubH 6001 Biological Concepts for Public Health 2 PubH 6002 Biostatistical Applications for Public Health 3 PubH 6003 Principles and Practice of Epidemiology 3 PubH 6247 Design of Health Studies 3 PubH 6252 Advanced Epidemiology Methods 3 PubH 6299 Topics (2 one credit courses or 1 two credit course) 2 Required Statistics Core Courses (6 Credits) Credits STAT 4157 Introduction to Mathematical Statistics I 3 STAT 4158 Introduction to Mathematical Statistics II 3 - OR - STAT 6201* Mathematical Statistics I 3 STAT 6202* Mathematical Statistics II 3 *Students interested in applying to the PhD degree program in Epidemiology may register in STAT 6201 and 6202, and not STAT 4157 and 4158. Advisor’s approval is required before registering for STAT 6201 and STAT 6202. Elective Courses (8 Total Credits) Public Health Elective Courses Credits PubH 6004 Environmental and Occupational Health in a Sustainable World 2 PubH 6007 Social and Behavioral Science Approaches to Public Health 2 PubH 6121 Environmental and Occupational Epidemiology 3 PubH 6123 Toxicology: Applications for Public Health Policy 3 PubH 6124 Problem Solving in Environ & Occupational Hlth 3 PubH 6242 Clinical Epidemiology and Decision Analysis 2 PubH 6243 Topics in Clinical Epi and Decision Analysis 1 PubH 6244 Cancer Epidemiology 2 PubH 6245 Infectious Disease Epidemiology 2 PubH 6250 Epidemiology of HIV/AIDS 2 PubH 6260 Advanced Data Analysis for Public Health 2 PubH 6262 Introduction to Geographic Information Systems 1 PubH 6283 Biostatistics Consulting Practicum 1 PubH 6299 Topics in Epidemiology & Biostatistics 1-2 Statistics Elective Courses Credits STAT 2118 Regression Analysis 3 STAT 4181 Applied Time Series Analysis 3 STAT 3187 Introduction to Sampling 3 Consulting and Thesis (3 Credits) PubH 6258 Advanced Topics in Biostatistical Consulting 1

PubH 6999 Thesis 2

MS in Public Health Microbiology and Emerging Infectious Diseases (PHMEID) Housed in the Department of Epi/Bio, the 45-credit MS in PHMEID has the following goals:

• Identify the biological complexities of microbial pathogens and the diseases they cause; • Recognize the major epidemiologic and clinical features of microbial disease; • Identify how new biotechnologies (including genomics, proteomics; bioinformatics) can be applied to the study and control of microbial pathogens; • Develop an in-depth understanding of epidemiologic principles and practice; and • Apply the principles of epidemiology, microbiology, and public health practice toward the detection, surveillance, investigation, and control of microbial diseases.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 160 Students enrolled in the MS, PHMEID program are required to take four or more credits of Epidemiology and Biostatistics courses, a three-credit environmental and occupational health and a course in essential public health laboratory skills. Additionally, all MS, PHMEID students are required to complete a field laboratory experience during which they are exposed to applied public health and laboratory environments. The students are then required to complete a thesis (the Final Project) through which they must synthesize data acquired through epidemiologic and/or public health laboratory research.

Until the fall of 2013, the program was offered jointly with the School of Medicine. At that time, the program was moved entirely under the domain of the Department of Epi/Bio to strengthen its orientation toward public health. The MS, PHMEID program had always had a public health focus in the courses that were offered through the Department of Epi/Bio. The courses in public health microbiology, virology, genomics, and laboratory microbiology, previously offered through the School of Medicine, are now taught from the public health perspective.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 161 Table 2.11.b.3.: MS, PHMEID Program Requirements *Note: There are additional elective courses not listed here that might be appropriate.

Prerequisites Credits Biological Sciences other than Botany > 12 Chemistry > 3 Calculus > 3 Required Foundation Courses – 10 Credits Course # Course Title Credits PubH 6002 Biostatistical Applications for Public Health 3 PubH 6003 Principles and Practice of Epidemiology 3 PubH 6004 Environmental & Occupational Health 2 PubH 6275 Essential Public Health Laboratory Skills 2 Required Epidemiology/Microbiology Courses – 22 Credits Course # Course Title Credits PubH 6245 Infectious Disease Epidemiology 2 PubH 6247 Design of Health Studies 3 PubH 6249 Use of Statistical Packages: Data Management and Data 3 Analysis PubH 6259 Epidemiologic Surveillance in Public Health 2 PubH 6262 Introduction to Geographic Information Systems 1 PubH 6276 Public Health Microbiology 3 PubH 6277 Public Health Genomics 2 PubH 6278 Public Health Virology 3 MICR 8210 Infection and Immunity 3 Elective Courses – 9 Credits* Course # Course Title Credits PubH 6127 Applied Environmental Health Microbiology 2 PubH 6132 WASH: Disaster Relief Management & Development 1 PubH 6239 Epidemiology of Foodborne and Waterborne Diseases 1 PubH 6242 Clinical Epidemiology and Decision Analysis 2 PubH 6243 Topics in Clinical Epidemiology and Decision Analysis 1 PubH 6250 Epidemiology of HIV/AIDS 2 PubH 6252 Advanced Epidemiologic Methods 3 PubH 6253 Issues in HIV/AIDS Care and Treatment 1 PubH 6261 Epi/Bio Skills Building Seminar 1 PubH 6263 Advanced Geographic Information Systems 1 PubH 6270 HIV/AIDS Surveillance 1 PubH 6271 Disaster Epidemiology: Methods and Applications 1 PubH 6299 TOPICS: Epidemiology of Sexually Transmitted Infections 2 PubH 6358 Vaccine Policy 2 PubH 6399 TOPICS: Homeland Security and Public Health 1 PubH 6484 Prevention & Control of Vector-Borne Diseases 2 PubH 6487 Emerging Zoonotic Diseases and Global Food Animal 1 Production MICR 6292 Tropical Infectious Diseases 2 Field/Laboratory Experience and Final Project – 4 Credits Course # Course Title Credits PubH 6016 Field/Laboratory Experience 2 PubH 6280 Final Project 2

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 162 MS in Exercise Science There have been two academic programs in the Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences (EXNS) - a MS in Exercise Science with a concentration in Clinical Exercise Physiology and a MS in Exercise Science with a concentration in Strength & Conditioning. SPH accepted the last cohort into the Clinical Exercise Physiology program in Fall 2014. This program will no longer be accepting new students.

The goals of the MS, Strength and Conditioning include:

• Establish scientific bases for the value of anaerobic exercise, and to provide internal and external programs that promote health behaviors across the lifespan; • Meet an increasing demand for well-educated professionals capable of delivering a broad range of exercise-based preventive, technical, educational, and rehabilitative services; • Gain insight into strategies for the prevention and treatment of sarcopenia, osteoporosis and childhood obesity; and • Provide advanced training in exercise physiology as it relates specifically to resistance training for the purpose of increasing athletic performance and the prevention or treatment of inactivity-related health disorders.

All students enrolled in the MS, Exercise Science programs are required to take 30 credits of coursework and a six-credit internship for a total of 36-credits.

Table 2.11.b.4.: MS, Exercise Science Curriculum

MSES Core Courses (17 credits) Credits PUBH 6002 Biostatistical Applications for Public Health 3 EXNS 6202 Advanced Exercise Physiology I 3 EXNS 6203 Advanced Exercise Physiology II 3 EXNS 6207 Psychological Aspects of Sport and Exercise 3 EXNS 6208 Physical Activity: Physiology & Epidemiology 2 EXNS 6209 Advanced Concepts in Nutrition Science 3

Program Specific Courses (13 credits) EXNS 6220 Power Training Laboratory 2 EXNS 6221 Science and Theory of Resistance Training 3 EXNS 6222 Current Topics in Strength and Conditioning 2 EXNS 6223 Biomechanical Analysis 3 ELECTIVE Approved by Program Director 3

Culminating Experience (6 credits) EXNS 6233 Graduate Internship and 6 Comprehensive Exam 0 Total Credits 36

The content of the core courses cover a breadth of information that addresses public health core areas. The social and behavioral aspects of physical activity are a primary focus of EXNS 6207. The effects of a

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 163 sedentary lifestyle and the resulting obesity problem are extensively covered in EXNS 6208. Policies relating to physical activity (such as American College of Sports Medicine physical activity guidelines) are discussed in EXNS 6202, 6203, 6208 and 6209. Examination of broad environmental factors which contribute to a sedentary lifestyle (e.g., screen time, phasing out of school physical education), as well as those that affect the food supply are themes which permeate all aspects of the program and are discussed in each class.

Over time, the MS, Exercise Science has been adapted to a hybrid delivery model, such that most coursework is now conducted online. In addition, the school-wide Curriculum Committee just approved changes to the program including adding PUBH 6002- Biostatistical Applications for Public Health to fill the gap in statistics content. The option to complete a thesis was eliminated for this program. All students in this program will complete the Internship and Comprehensive exam.

PhD in Epidemiology Most PhD students in Epidemiology enter the doctoral program with an MPH degree so they have already been exposed to a public health orientation. As part of the doctoral program students are required to complete 18 credits in public health courses, and between 15 and 18 credits in either epidemiology or statistics elective courses. Those who matriculate intp the PhD Epidemiology program that have an MPH degree can transfer up to 24 credits, the equivalent of the non-required public health courses, from their MPH degree towards the PhD. Students that do not have an MPH degree must complete ALL of the required public health credits and have the opportunity to take more public health courses as electives. The PhD Program Director reviews transcripts with all students, and for those without an MPH degree identifies appropriate public health courses to develop a plan of study that will encompass all educational requirements. As these students do not transfer in many credits since they do not have a MPH degree, there is additional room in the program for them to take public health courses as electives when needed. In addition, a requirement for the doctoral dissertation is a clear consideration and explication of the public health significance of their research.

PHD in Social and Behavioral Sciences in Public Health (SBS) This newly approved program will admit its first students in the fall of 2016. The PhD in SBS will train strong theoretical, methodological, and practical scholars, whose contributions could be as practitioners or academics. Our students will be well trained in a substantive health area with a strong background in theory of social and behavior change, study design and evaluation, and statistical methods.

It is anticipated that most PhD students in SBS will enter the doctoral program with an MPH degree, thus, they will have already been exposed to a public health orientation. SBS PhD students without an MPH will be required to complete one course serving as an Introduction to Public Health and one course serving as an Introduction to Epidemiology--per personal communication with CEPH

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 164 headquarters. Additionally, the graduate director will review transcripts individually for students who do not have a MPH degree to identify areas where they are lacking in core public health education to identify an individual plan of study that will encompass these educational requirements. As they will not have likely transferred-in many credits since they do not have a MPH degree, there is room in the program for these students to take public health courses as electives to acquire these missing skills. Notably, as part of the doctoral program students are required to complete an additional 18 credits in public health courses, and 14 credits exploring more deeply their area of expertise in public health. And, a requirement for the doctoral dissertation is a clear consideration and explication of the public health significance of their research.

2.11.c. Identification of the culminating experience required for each academic degree program. If this is common across the school academic degree programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

Examples of student work, course syllabi and rubrics and other materials are available in the electronic resource file. ERF 2.11.c.: Academic Programs – Student Work Samples and Materials.

MS in Health Policy Students in the Health Policy Master of Science program are required to complete a year-long research project that consists of a two-credit research design course (PUBH 6345-Health Policy Research and Design) where students are required to develop and design a research proposal, and a three-credit self- directed research thesis guided by the MS advisor. The three-credit self-directed course is used to implement the study students develop in the Health Policy Research and Design course and write up, in a scientific report format, the findings of the study.

MS in Epidemiology Students receive practical experience in the MS program through the completion of a thesis directed by department faculty. The purpose of the thesis is to provide the student an opportunity to apply skills that go beyond the classroom experience to include the following: how to draft a proposal; how to complete a data analysis plan; how to communicate complex statistical analysis results; and how to present and defend their findings to investigators of varied scientific and quantitative backgrounds.

Students present their findings to faculty in the department at the end of the semester. Faculty evaluations are the basis of the grade (credit/no credit). Students receiving a no-credit grade will work with their thesis advisor to remedy the thesis based on faculty feedback and provided a second opportunity to present and defend their research.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 165 MS in PHMEID All students are required to complete a final project that consists of development of a concept paper, proposal, final report, and oral presentation. These requirements are similar to those of the MPH students’ Culminating Experience.

MS in Exercise Science Students enrolled in the Strength & Conditioning concentration have had the choice of completing a six- credit internship or a six-credit thesis. Students who chose the internship option also took comprehensive exams. The comprehensive exams cover all material covered in the required Strength & Conditioning curriculum. Students who chose the thesis option defended their thesis to a faculty committee in an open forum in order to meet the requirements for graduation. However, going forward, the thesis option has been eliminated. All students in this program will now complete the internship and comprehensive exam.

Graduate students enrolled in the Clinical Exercise Physiology (CEP) program must successfully complete the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) Clinical Exercise Specialist® certification examination. This certification examination is typically taken in the last semester of the program. Twenty three of 24 students who have taken the exam have passed. The CEP track was deactivated in 2015 and is no longer accepting new students.

PhD in Epidemiology The first part of student assessment are the general examinations, which are completed prior to advancing to candidacy in the PhD program and assess an advanced level of knowledge and ability to apply this knowledge in epidemiology and biostatistics. The PhD comprehensive examinations cover four areas: PUBH 6247- Design of Health Studies, PUBH 6252- Advanced Epidemiologic Methods, PUBH 8419- Measurement in Public Health and Health Services and PUBH 8366- Biostatistical Methods and are completed by students over two days prior to the start of the fall semester. Examples of the comprehensive exams are in ERF 2.11.c referenced earlier.

PhD students in Epidemiology are required to complete a doctoral dissertation under the guidance of a three to four member dissertation committee primarily composed of faculty from the Department of Epi/Bio. The ultimate goals and evaluation criteria for the doctoral dissertation include a significant, new contribution to the field of research chosen by the student and the demonstration of competency with an advanced statistical technique. The public health significance of the research must be clearly explained in the research proposal, and the public health impact of the research findings discussed in the final dissertation. Students are expected to comply with current NIH guidelines for research proposals, including completion of required human subject training and submission of the proposal to the GW Institutional Review Board (IRB). PhD Epidemiology students have the option of completing an

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 166 alternative dissertation that includes three manuscripts of publishable quality. Preliminary evaluation of the impact of this change in PhD curriculum, implemented in 2005, indicates that PhD Epidemiology students that use the alternative format publish their dissertation results at twice the rate of those that completed a traditional dissertation. Students are made aware of both options and choose the best option for their situation. The final dissertation is evaluated by the three-to-four member dissertation committee, as well as by one internal and one external expert in the field to provide objective assessment of the quality and contribution of the doctoral work. Almost all of the external experts that serve on the PhD Epidemiology evaluation committees are from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

PHD in Social and Behavioral Sciences As the dissertation is the culminating experience for these PhD students, these students will complete required coursework and pass the comprehensive exam to be officially admitted to the candidacy phase of the program. Before beginning work on their dissertation, students will enroll in a one-credit course, currently being developed as ‘Advanced Theorizing in Social and Behavioral Sciences in Public Health’. Students will complete six-credits of dissertation research before becoming eligible to defend their dissertation before their Dissertation Research Committee. The dissertation process is described in Criteria 2.5.a. Doctoral students must conduct original research on a contemporary public health problem or issue and are expected to make a significant scholarly contribution and gain the expertise and skills that enable them to make a continuing impact on the field.

2.11.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The MS, Health Policy instituted the required two-credit course Health Policy Research and Design in 2011 to facilitate the development of scientifically rigorous MS-level thesis study. Prior to this course, students had very little exposure to how to design a health policy research project, and theses varied substantially in terms of quality. The MS in health policy also allows substantial individualization in study through the availability of 17-18 elective credits that students can use to develop a content area of expertise (e.g. maternal and child health, disparities in care, long-term care). • The MS, Epidemiology is well established and recognized for its emphasis on quantitative methods and solid preparation for a doctoral program. This MS program also serves as a training ground for those applicants that are not ready to pursue a doctoral degree, offering an expedited, although not guaranteed, admission to the doctoral program provided there is outstanding achievement in the required MS courses. • The PHMEID program is unique in its offerings (i.e. teaching a combination of skills related to the interface between public health and laboratory sciences with an emphasis on infectious diseases) and is one of only two such programs in the country.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 167 • The MS, PHMEID curriculum focuses on practical skills in addition to laboratory skills. These include opportunities to become proficient in public speaking, critical thinking and communicating scientific findings. The students are challenged to interpret data to create posters, write abstracts, and give verbal presentations. Having practical laboratory skills that make the students more marketable when they matriculate.

Challenges: • The MS Health Policy program currently lacks an MS-level qualitative course for students to introduce them to some research methodologies (e.g. qualitative research, survey design) in health policy. Discussions are underway about how to meet this need, possibly by using existing curricula in other programs. • Faculty are exploring methods to strengthen the requirements for the culminating Final Project for the MS, PHMEID to increase the likelihood that manuscripts, instead of theses, will be created for potential publication.

Future plans: • The MS, Health Policy faculty will do a comprehensive review of the competencies and curriculum in AY 2015-16. As part of this review, the HPM Department Curriculum Committee will identify gaps in general public health content and research skills and develop a strategy to address them through development of new courses or changes to existing course content. • Strengthen recruitment efforts for the MS, Epidemiology degree to increase size of incoming cohorts. • Based on an external review, the MS, Epidemiology comprehensive examinations have been eliminated beginning with the cohort that matriculated in Fall 2015. Instead, the program now requires these students to complete a thesis that will be similar to the MPH culminating experience and other MS program thesis requirements. • The MS, Clinical Exercise Physiology is being phased out. No new students have been accepted since Fall 2014. Current students are expected to graduate by May 2016. • The thesis option for the MS, Exercise Science in Strength & Conditioning is being eliminated beginning Fall 2016. The culminating experience will be an internship and comprehensive exam for all students. This program is converting to a hybrid model with most coursework taught online.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 168 2.12 DOCTORAL DEGREES. THE SCHOOL SHALL OFFER AT LEAST THREE DOCTORAL DEGREE PROGRAMS THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THREE OF THE FIVE AREAS OF BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH KNOWLEDGE.

2.12.a. Identification of all doctoral programs offered by the school, by degree and area of specialization. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose. If the school is a new applicant and has graduates from only one doctoral program, a description of plans and a timetable for graduating students from the other two doctoral programs must be presented, with university documentation supporting the school’s projections.

The Milken Institute SPH offers four DrPH programs and two PhD programs as described throughout this Criteria. These doctoral programs are relevant to four of the five core areas of public health knowledge; environmental health sciences; social and behavioral sciences; health policy and management; and epidemiology. In addition, the SPH offers a DrPH degree in Global Health. See the Instructional Matrix in 2.1.a. The University offers a PhD degree in Biostatistics conferred by the Statistics Department in the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences (CCAS). Faculty in the SPH Department of Epidemiology and Biostastics (DEB) assist with advising and teaching courses for this program.

Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) Degree The SPH DrPH degree is designed to prepare professionals to assume national and global leadership positions in one of four areas: 1) environmental and occupational health; 2) global health; 3) health behavior; and 4) health policy. These four distinct tracks prepare students to apply critical thinking and rigorous research methods to the complex practical problems facing practitioners and policy-makers in public health leadership. The DrPH degree is designed for students who enter the program with a master’s degree, preferably an MPH, and generally several years of relevant work experience. While work experience is not a requirement for admission, over 95% of our incoming class in the last several cohorts has had relevant work experience; over 65% have five or more years of relevant work experience. While many DrPH students attend the program on a full-time basis, program courses are often scheduled after work hours to accommodate part-time, working students. Admission to the SPH DrPH program is open every other year, fall semester of even-numbered years. The program guides for each of the four DrPH programs can be found at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics/graduate/drph-programs.

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Degree in Epidemiology The GW Columbian College has offered a PhD in Epidemiology since 1998. In July 2013 the program was transferred to the Milken Institute School of Public Health. Housed in the DEB, the mission of the Epidemiology PhD program is to prepare students for a career in epidemiologic research in an academic, government, or industry setting. Most applicants have already completed a Master’s degree, but this is

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 169 not required. Most matriculating students work part-time or full-time and pursue their degree on a part-time basis, attending classes in the afternoon and evenings. The PhD in Epidemiology program reviews and admits applicants annually.

The goals of the PhD program in Epidemiology are to ensure graduates: 1) gain knowledge across a wide range of epidemiologic and biostatistical theories and methods; 2) gain specific knowledge of epidemiology in one or more of the following areas: infectious disease, chronic disease, environmental and occupational health, or physical activity; 3) understand general and specialized advanced epidemiologic concepts; 4) understand how to apply statistical methods to biological/biomedical sciences and health services; 5) understand and abide by guidelines for ethical treatment of research participants; 6) conduct and analyze data from a research study; and 7) disseminate research findings to scientific and lay audiences. The guide for the program can be found at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/epidemiology-phd.

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Social and Behavioral Sciences in Public Health This new doctoral program will welcome its first cohort in the fall of 2016. The program guide for this program can be found at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/social-and-behavioral-sciences-phd. As per the letter from CEPH dated September 10, 2015, the SPH will present this program during the site visit.

2.12.b. Description of specific support and resources available to doctoral students including traineeships, mentorship opportunities, etc.

The SPH offers Graduate Assistant (GA) and Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) positions to select full- time students within our DrPH and PhD programs. The current GA package includes 18 credits of tuition support, a stipend of $17,000.00, and a payment for services of $5,000.00 per academic year. The school offers a total of eight GA packages to selected DrPH students with two students per program area receiving a position. Four additional GA packages can be awarded between the PhD in Epidemiology and the PhD in Social and Behavioral Sciences. GAs serve as teaching assistants for two courses per semester, primarily for school core courses or department-specific required courses. In addition to these instruction-based GA positions, the school offers additional GA and GRA positions depending on their availability within funded projects. GRA positions provide a combination of tuition-support and salary payments that is similar to the level of support provided by GA positions. Exact funding levels for GRA positions are determined at the time of hire and based on the parameters of the associated funded project. GRA positions emphasize the production of generalizable knowledge and do not require service as a teaching assistant within the classroom.

The SPH has recently received several generous gifts that now enable us to offer more competitive scholarship packages to support doctoral students. Currently, the Milken Scholars program provides scholarship funding that is equivalent to 36 credit hours of support distributed over two academic years.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 170 Four doctoral students received a designation as a Milken Scholar in the 2015-2016 academic year, and current budget projections indicate that the SPH will be in a position to maintain support for four new Milken Scholars per academic year. In addition to formal designations as Milken Scholars, the School offers financial support to supplement the funding for Gates Scholars and to provide financial support during the dissertation process. Detailed information about dollar amounts that the School provides for doctoral students can be found in Criteria 1.1.d: Outcomes Measures.

The school has numerous mentorship opportunities available for doctoral students, given both its substantial research portfolio and its location in the heart of Washington, DC. DrPH and PhD students frequently participate in research projects that provide outstanding learning and mentorship experiences as well as publication opportunities. DrPH and PhD students also enjoy ample opportunities to develop their professional experience. For example, most matriculating Epidemiology PhD students work in the DC metro area in government agencies (e.g., NIH, HHS, DOD), independent consulting firms (e.g., Emmes, RTI), or other health-related organizations where they gain research experience and future employment opportunities.

2.12.c. Data on student progression through each of the school’s doctoral programs, to include the total number of students enrolled, number of students completing coursework and number of students in candidacy for each doctoral program. See CEPH Template 2.12.1.

CEPH Data Template 2.12.1.: Doctoral Student Data DrPH- 2012-13 DrPH- 2013-14 DrPH 2014-15

# Newly Admitted (Fall) 21 0 21 # Currently Enrolled- (Fall) 61 54 70 # Completed Coursework 22 17 3 # Advanced to candidacy 21 17 3 # Graduated 6 4 9

PhD 2012-13* PhD- 2013-14 PhD 2014-15

# Newly Admitted (Fall) N/A 3 4 # Currently Enrolled- (Fall) N/A 25 24 # Completed Coursework N/A 3 5 # Advanced to candidacy N/A 3 3 # Graduated N/A 1 4

*Note: PhD program was not part of SPH in 2012-13

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 171 2.12.d. Identification of specific coursework, for each degree, that is aimed at doctoral-level education.

DrPH Program The 20-credit core foundational courses for the four DrPH programs are all doctoral level courses (8000 level). An additional four Leadership credits are required; PUBH 8413- Research Leadership and PUBH 8415- Instructional Leadership. Also, upon successful completion of the comprehensive exam, all DrPH students are required to take a two credit course, PUBH 8422- Advanced Health Care and Public Health Research Design. Here the doctoral candidates develop a draft dissertation proposal and prepare to defend it. The program also requires six to nine dissertation credits. Additionally, each DrPH student is required to take two Advanced Seminar courses (six credits) within their specialty area (EOH, GH, HB, or HP). Of the 48 credits required to complete the DrPH program, 32 credits, plus dissertation credits, are at the doctoral level. Transfer credits are not accepted toward the DrPH degree. DrPH students take elective credits, based on their individual interests, to earn 48 credits. Below is an outline of the required doctoral level coursework:

Table 2.12.d.1: DrPH Program- Required Curriculum (electives not included) REQUIRED PROGRAM TOTAL = 48 credits Required Foundational/Methods Courses (20 credits) Course Credits Title PubH 8401 3 Foundations of Public Health Leadership and Practice – Doctoral Seminar PubH 8402 2 Leadership in Public Health Practice and Policy PubH 8416 3 Study Design and Evaluation PubH 8417 3 Qualitative Research Methods and Analysis PubH 8418 3 Applied Statistical Analysis PubH 8419 3 Measurement in Public Health and Health Services Research PubH 8420 3 Advanced Analysis and Dissemination Required Advanced Seminars (6 credits)-specific to each specialty field area Professional Leadership Courses (4 credits) PubH 8413 Varies Research Leadership PubH 8415 Varies Instructional Leadership (2 credits required) Required Dissertation Prep and Dissertation Credits (8- 11 Credits) PubH 8422 2 Advanced Health Care and Public Health Research Design PubH 8423 6-9 Dissertation Research

PHD Epidemiology The Epidemiology PhD is a 72-credit program. Almost all students enter the program with a master’s degree and may transfer up to 24 credits toward the doctoral degree, leaving 48 credits in the SPH PhD curriculum. There are two tracks to follow in the PhD program.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 172 Overview:

• Core courses: 33 credits (Track A); 30 credits (Track B) • Elective Courses: 15 credits (Track A); 18 credits (Track B) • 3 credits consulting • 12-21 credits dissertation research

Table 2.12.d.2: PhD, Epidemiology Required Coursework Required Public Health Core Courses (18 Credits) Credits PubH 6001 Biological Concepts for Public Health 2 PubH 6003 Principles and Practice of Epidemiology 3 PubH 6247 Design of Health Studies 3 Basis for PhD General Comprehensive PubH 6252 Advanced Epidemiologic Methods 3 Basis for PhD General Comprehensive PubH 8419 Measurement in Public Health and Health Services 3 Basis for PhD General Comprehensive And either combination of the following for a total of 4 credits: PubH 6299 Topics (Elective courses) 2 And either: PubH 6004 Environmental & Occupational Health in a Sustainable World -or- 2 PubH 6007 Social & Behavioral Approaches to Public Health 2 -OR- PubH 6299 Topics (Elective course) 1 And PubH 6006 Management and Policy in Public Health 3 Required Statistics Core Courses (12 - 15 Credits) Credits STAT 6210 Data Analysis 3 PubH 8365 Design of Medical Studies 3 PubH 8366 Biostatistical Methods 3 Basis for PhD General Comprehensive OPTION A ONLY: STAT 6201 Mathematical Statistics I 3 STAT 6202 Mathematical Statistics II 3

OPTION B ONLY: PubH 8364 Quantitative Methods 3 Consulting (3 Credits) Note: May be waived by the Epidemiology Program Director, based on written documentation of prior equivalent course work or relevant work experience. Waiver of the consulting course increases the total number of electives by the number of consulting credits waived.

PubH 6258 Advanced Topics in Biostatistical Consulting 1 PubH 6283 Consulting Practicum 2 Dissertation Research (12-21 Credits) PubH 8999 Dissertation Research for PhD Epidemiology Students Taken in units of 3 credits

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 173 Of the required courses, nine-to-twelve credits are doctoral (8000 level) courses. Currently, there are also numerous doctoral-level courses available to take as electives, such as courses in: Clinical Epidemiology and Decision Analysis; Cancer Epidemiology; Infections Disease Epidemiology; Epidemiology of HIV/AIDS; and Epidemiology Surveillance in Public Health. Students are also eligible to take doctoral courses offered in the SPH DrPH program or the GW Department of Statistics.

Students can choose to focus their PhD program in a particular area, such as Environmental Epidemiology. In this case, the student would be expected to take the following coursework for 15 of the elective credits:

• PUBH 6123- Toxicology: Application for Public Health; • PUBH 6121- Environmental & Occupational Epidemiology; • PUBH 6126 – Assessment & Control/Environmental Hazards; • PUBH 8411-Advanced Topics: Principles of Human Health Risk Science; and • PUBH 8412- Advanced Topics: Environmental and Occupational Health Research and Practice.

Additionally, three consulting credits are required, but may be waived by the Program Director upon submission of written documentation of prior equivalent course work or relevant work experience. Waiver of the consulting course increases the total number of electives by the number of consulting credits waived.

PHD in Social and Behavioral Sciences in Public Health (SBS)

The new PHD, SBS will be implemented with a strong doctoral level curriculum. The program is a 48- credit curriculum and does not accept any transfer credits. The requirements for this PhD includes a total of seven credits of dissertation/dissertation preparation; a new one-credit dissertation preparation course will be developed; and six-credits of dissertation research. In addition to the required curriculum, students take 14 elective credits to customize their program. The curriculum outline for this program is as follows:

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 174 Table 2.12.d.3.: PhD, SBS Required Curriculum Required Foundational Methods Courses (12 credits) Course Credits Title PubH 8416 3 Study Design and Evaluation PubH 8417 3 Qualitative Research Methods and Analysis PubH 8418 3 Applied Statistical Analysis PubH 8419 3 Measurement in Public Health and Health Services Research Required Advanced Methods Courses (6 credits)- choose from options below: PUBH 8xxx 3 Data Analysis and Presentation in Social and Behavioral Sciences Research (NEW) EDUC 8140 3 Ethnographic Research Methods EDUC 8172 3 Multivariate Analysis EDUC 8173 3 Structural Equation Modeling EDUC 8131 3 Case Study Research Methods Structural Equation Modeling PSYC 8231 3 Development of Psychometric Instruments PUBH 8366 3 Design of Medical Studies PUBH 6263 1 Advanced GIS PUBH 6273 1 Ethnographic Methods PUBH 6533 2 Design of Community Health Surveys PUBH 6310 3 Statistical Analysis in Health Policy PUBH 8364 2 Qualitative Methods Required Specialty Field Courses (9 courses) PubH 8408 3 Advanced Topics in Health Behavior Research and Practice– Doctoral Seminar PubH 8409 3 Advanced Topics in Health Communication Research- Doctoral Seminar PubH 8xxx 3 Advanced Topics in Behavioral Medicine- Doctoral Seminar (NEW) Required Dissertation and Dissertation Prep (7 credits) PubH 8xxx 1 Advanced Theorizing in Social & Behavioral Sciences in PH (NEW) PubH 8423 6 Dissertation Research

2.12.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths:

• The school has five doctoral degree programs, and with CEPH approval, has added one additional PhD starting in Fall 2016. • More than one-third of students in the four DrPH program and 10% of Epidemiology PhD students are funded under Graduate Assistant positions. The school has also increased the funding made available for additional tuition support that can be used for non-GA students. Each of the four DrPH programs receives approximately 15 credits per academic year to distribute across students not otherwise funded. The PhD Program receives 21 credits for one- time merit scholarships for incoming students.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 175 • The DrPH program is very selective and attracts highly qualified, diverse, energetic and passionate applicants. These include current public health professionals with substantial relevant practice, policy and leadership experience. • The PhD in Epidemiology program is also very selective enrolling, on average, less than six new students each academic year from an annual applicant pool of 60 to 80. • The PhD in Epidemiology has incorporated areas of concentration in Environmental & Occupational Health as well as Physical Activity Epidemiology. • The creation of cohorts of students who take core courses together fosters collaboration and strong professional relationships.

Challenges: • We currently have no training grants. • DrPH students would benefit from an additional course focused on more advanced leadership and management skills. • Some doctoral students will benefit from higher-level methods courses. • Limited PhD options.

Future Plans: • The doctoral programs will investigate opportunities for supporting DrPH students during both the pre-candidacy and candidacy phases. • The DrPH committee will work with current DrPH faculty and other management faculty to expand the curriculum related to leadership/management skills. • The Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics is in the process of developing doctoral level courses in epidemiology methods as well as applied biostatistical methods. • The Department of Environmental and Occupational Health is developing a PhD in Environmental Health for possible launch in 2017. • Pursue training grants.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 176 2.13 JOINT DEGREES. IF THE SCHOOL OFFERS JOINT DEGREE PROGRAMS, THE REQUIRED CURRICULUM FOR THE PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH DEGREE SHALL BE EQUIVALENT TO THAT REQUIRED FOR A SEPARATE PUBLIC HEALTH DEGREE.

2.13.a. Identification of joint degree programs offered by the school. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

The SPH has the following professional joint degrees. Also see Instructional Matrix in Criteria 2.1.a.

Table 2.13.a: Joint Program Enrollment Program AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 AY 2015-16 PA-MPH 46 45 40 JD/LLM-MPH 4 4 4 MD- MPH 2 1 1 MA-MPH 1 1 2 HCC-MHA 1 3 0 Data from Fall census.

2.13.b. A list and description of how each joint degree program differs from the standard degree program. The school must explain the rationale for any credit sharing or substitution as well as the process for validating that the joint degree curriculum is equivalent.

The standard MPH is 45 credits.

Table 2.13.b.: Credit Sharing for Joint Degree Programs Program Shared Credits Explanation

PA (MSHS)-MPH • PA 6109 is cross credited to • PA 6109*- Foundations of Medicine count for PUBH 6001 (2 credits). provides ample human science • PA 6112 & PA 6122 count for 5 content to substitute for PUBH 6001- elective credits. Biological Concepts in PH. • In COPC track only- PA 6113 • PA 6112*- Clinical Medicine 1 and PA counts for PUBH 6514 (2 credits) 6122*-Role of the PA in American Health Care provide relevant content to represent elective coursework. • PA 6113*- Clinical Medicine 2 replaces a requirement in the COPC program (PUBH 6514- Preventing Health Disparities) because of repetitive material. JD-MPH & 8 credits Up to 8 credits from the law school can be LLM-MPH counted toward elective credits in the MPH. Each course is evaluated individually for content and relevance to an MPH related to health law and policy.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 177 Table 2.13.b.: Credit Sharing for Joint Degree Programs, (continued) Program Shared Credits Explanation MD-MPH PUBH 6001 (2 credits) waived. These students have ample human science. MA/MPH 6 credits Students can carry 6 credits from the MA to the MPH to use as elective credits. The MA program allows students to use 12 credits from the MPH program to satisfy MA requirements.

Peace Corp-MPH None

Certificate in Credits earned in the certificate can Healthcare be applied to the master’s degree. Corporate Compliance (HCC)-MPH or MS in Health Policy/ MHA * These syllabi are available in ERF 2.6.c- Required Syllabi (PCH department)

2.13.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Joint degrees are offered with the Law School, Columbian College, College of Professional Studies, and the School of Medicine and Health Sciences. • Academic collaboration with United States Peace Corp for the Master’s International Program.

Challenges: • The PA and MD joint programs have been very credit-heavy. • Some of the joint degrees should be more blended. • Application process can be confusing.

Future Plans: • This past year we worked with the School of Medicine and Health Sciences to review and revise the joint PA/MPH program to reduce credits. We rolled out the new curriculum in Fall 2015 and will continue to monitor program success. • We are in discussions with the School of Medicine to evaluate a PH certificate for medical students. • Greater visibility for joint programs. • Investigate joint programs with the School of Nursing and the School of Business.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 178 2.14 DISTANCE EDUCATION OR EXECUTIVE DEGREE PROGRAMS. IF THE SCHOOL OFFERS DEGREE PROGRAMS USING FORMATS OR METHODS OTHER THAN STUDENTS ATTENDING REGULAR ON-SITE COURSE SESSIONS SPREAD OVER A STANDARD TERM, THESE PROGRAMS MUST A) BE CONSISTENT WITH THE MISSION OF THE SCHOOL AND WITHIN THE SCHOOL’S ESTABLISHED AREAS OF EXPERTISE; B) BE GUIDED BY CLEARLY ARTICULATED STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES THAT ARE RIGOROUSLY EVALUATED; C) BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME QUALITY CONTROL PROCESSES THAT OTHER DEGREE PROGRAMS IN THE SCHOOL AND UNIVERSITY ARE; AND D) PROVIDE PLANNED AND EVALUATED LEARNING EXPERIENCES THAT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AND ARE RESPONSIVE TO THE CHARACTERISTICS AND NEEDS OF ADULT LEARNERS. IF THE SCHOOL OFFERS DISTANCE EDUCATION OR EXECUTIVE DEGREE PROGRAMS, IT MUST PROVIDE NEEDED SUPPORT FOR THESE PROGRAMS, INCLUDING ADMINISTRATIVE, TRAVEL, COMMUNICATION AND STUDENT SERVICES. THE SCHOOL MUST HAVE AN ONGOING PROGRAM TO EVALUATE THE ACADEMIC EFFECTIVENESS OF THE FORMAT, TO ASSESS LEARNING METHODS AND TO SYSTEMATICALLY USE THIS INFORMATION TO STIMULATE PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS. THE SCHOOL MUST HAVE PROCESSES IN PLACE THROUGH WHICH IT ESTABLISHES THAT THE STUDENT WHO REGISTERS IN A DISTANCE EDUCATION OR CORRESPONDENCE EDUCATION COURSE OR DEGREE IS THE SAME STUDENT WHO PARTICIPATES IN AND COMPLETED THE COURSE OR DEGREE AND RECEIVES THE ACADEMIC CREDIT.

2.14.a Identification of all degree programs that are offered in a format other than regular, on-site course sessions spread over a standard term, including those offered in full or in part through distance education in which the instructor and student are separated in time or place or both. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

As shown in the instructional matrix provided in Criteria 2.1.a, our School offers two online degree programs: the MPH@GW and the MHA@GW.

The MPH@GW is a distance education Master of Public Health program which we began offering in June 2013.

The first cohort in the online Executive Master of Health Administration (MHA@GW) program matriculated in April 2014. The MHA@GW allows students to complete their MHA degree in as little as two years. The program is offered in a hybrid delivery model made up of two parts: eight, ten week long online integrated learning modules and four, on-site immersions. Two of the immersions are two-and-a- half days in length and two are five days in length.

2.14.b. Description of the distance education or executive degree programs, including an explanation of the model or methods used, the school’s rationale for offering these programs, the manner in which it provides necessary administrative and student support services, the manner in which it

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 179 monitors the academic rigor of the programs and their equivalence (or comparability) to other degree programs offered by the school, and the manner in which it evaluates the educational outcomes, as well as the format and methods.

MPH@GW

The online MPH program (MPH@GW) was developed as a result of the School-wide strategic planning process. First, the GW MPH program was falling behind our market basket schools in regards to flexibility of curricular programming and course delivery modes. To remain competitive and ensure financial stability of the school, distance education was considered an important and missing piece of our education portfolio. Second, the MPH@GW program has allowed us to extend our reach and thus, increase the diversity of our student population. The online program provides a vehicle to support more military personnel and families, as well as many working adults, who cannot attend on campus courses or re-locate to the DC area. Online education has also provided opportunities for parents of young children who also face the challenges associated with commuting to campus. As anticipated, our online student body is older than the residential student body and, in general, has more extensive work experience. We have also been able to yield students from a much larger geographical area, which also adds diversity to the school. Online students are encouraged to be active in student organizations and can serve as student representatives for a number of committees, often participating remotely through the LMS platform or Skype.

The MPH@GW program emphasizes local, national, and global health practice. The program delivers an interdisciplinary teaching and learning experience, with a focus on core competencies/skills, and uses cases/other materials from both the U.S. and abroad. The program’s pedagogical approach emphasizes the application of skills and theory and utilizes a “flipped classroom” model in which students complete each weekly unit’s asynchronous course content before attending a live discussion session lead by their instructor. The program allows students to tailor their education to a community, national, or global level interest in the U.S. and countries around the world. It emphasizes interdisciplinary public health competencies including: biostatistics and epidemiology; cultural competency; health communication; leadership; professionalism; planning, implementation and evaluation methods; public health biology; and systems thinking.

The MPH@GW provides a practice-oriented MPH curriculum that enables graduates to be leaders in the design of population and community health programs in the US and abroad. The program consists of the GW MPH core courses, incorporates a broad range of program requirements to reflect the breadth of public health education, and includes a choice of ten elective credits. Students can use electives to gain depth in a specific area of public health, or can spread across topic areas as they choose. Students who choose to concentrate their electives could, for example, emphasize areas such as health communication, health policy, program planning and evaluation, or other areas within the distance education curriculum.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 180 All MPH@GW students enroll in the Core Courses (15 credits), Program-Specific Courses (16 credits), and Electives (10 credits). The total 45 credit degree program also includes a Practicum (two credits) and a Culminating Experience (two credits) where students apply their didactic education in a real world setting. The MPH@GW curriculum ensures students obtain 10 program-specific competencies.

The program receives significant support from 2U (http://2u.com/). Staff at 2U manage the crucial “behind the scenes” operational activities including student marketing and recruitment, provision of a proprietary online learning management system (LMS) including faculty training, production of all video content for the online modules, technology support for students and faculty and direct support for the in-person immersions. All of the curricular content is owned and controlled by the faculty in the Milken Institute SPH.

Standards for admission of students into the MPH@GW are as follows:

• 3.2 undergraduate GPA or higher; • Completion of standardized tests with scores demonstrating sufficient verbal, quantitative, and writing competency to be successful in MPH studies OR previous completion of a Master’s level or higher graduate degree in another field; • Two letters of recommendation; and • A written statement of purpose.

The MPH@GW program was developed by an internal faculty working group, then vetted and approved by the School-wide Curriculum Committee. The vast majority of the courses were adaptations of previously existing courses and lead by the same faculty members. To ensure that the online versions of courses are addressing key competencies/learning objectives and contain the rigor of equivalent on-campus courses, all courses in the MPH@GW program were reviewed and approved by the School-wide Curriculum Committee. This review occurs regardless of whether a particular course has already been offered on campus, to ensure course quality and ensure that the required competencies will be obtained. The school-wide Curriculum Committee also made certain requests to ensure the robustness of the online program, such as the addition of more methods courses. As a result, both a quantitative (PUBH 6052) and qualitative (PUBH 6530) general methods course were created for this program. In addition, certain courses were created for the online program primarily at faculty request, and after being vetted by the MPH@GW advisory committee and approved by the School-wide Curriculum committee. Reasons for faculty requests to create an online course included the desire to create a course that could be used for practice work (Researching Violence Against Women and Girls, Sexual and Reproductive Health Monitoring, Global Health Diplomacy) or because faculty members found that teaching online was a better fit for them personally.

Specific information about the MPH@GW can be found here: https://publichealthonline.gwu.edu/ .

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 181 The program has a faculty/staff/student advisory committee that meets monthly to discuss curricular and extracurricular issues. Weekly meetings of 2U and GW faculty and staff focus on student and operations issues. All of the required courses have been developed by full time SPH faculty who also teach in the residential programs. The curriculum and any revisions to it are approved by the School- wide Curriculum Committee.

MHA@GW

The Executive MHA (MHA@GW) is designed to accommodate the needs of adult learners who are currently working full-time in the health sector with at least three years of full-time experience in the field. The program will matriculate approximately 25 students per quarter (January, April, July and October) in four cohorts, for a total of 100 students per year. In contrast, the residential MHA program typically matriculates between 25-30 students every fall with another one to three students starting in the spring. The MHA@GW is particularly attractive to adult learners working in the health sector in that while the majority of the program is offered online, students only have to travel to Washington, DC for the on-site immersions twice a year over two years.

There is no overlap between the residential and executive MHA degrees in terms of courses. The residential curriculum has been re-designed into a set of eight integrated learning modules that are delivered online and are five credits each except for the final module (Module 8 – Systems Thinking and Learning) that is four credits.

The first two on-site immersions focus on leadership and ethics. The third immersion provides an opportunity for an in-depth health system analysis. The final immersion provides time for students to present their two program deliverables – an applied organizational research project and a personal leadership portfolio. The integrated learning modules are combinations of at least two content areas from our residential curriculum that logically fit together and are constructed to meet the educational needs of mid-career adult learners. In contrast, the residential MHA courses are typically two credits each and like most traditional courses, concentrate on just one content area. All of the modules and immersions in the MHA@GW are headed up by faculty from the Milken Institute School of Public Health. In addition to a regular GW faculty member, at least one highly experienced practitioner is also part of the teaching team.

Just as for the MPH@GW, the program receives significant operational support from 2U (www.2u.com) and all of the curricular content is owned and controlled by the faculty in the Milken Institute SPH.

The competency model for the MHA@GW is the same as for the residential MHA. The model is made up of 32 competencies grouped in five domains. The competencies form the framework of both MHA degrees and are designed to be in congruence with the requirements of the Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education (CAHME). The residential MHA received full

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 182 reaccreditation by CAHME in October 2013 and the intent is to put the MHA@GW up for accreditation once the second group of students graduates in October 2016.

Standards for admission of students into the MHA@GW are as follows:

• 3.0 undergraduate GPA or higher; • Minimum of three years of full time experience in the health sector in either a clinical or administrative role; • Current full-time employment in a healthcare organization; the first three cohorts of students in the MHA@GW have an average of five-and-a-half years of full-time health sector experience; • Two letters of recommendation; and • Written statement of purpose and submission of a video with answers to two behavioral based interview questions.

All MHA@GW students must also complete undergraduate courses in financial accounting and descriptive statistics prior to matriculation. Specific information about the MHA@GW can be found at: https://mha.gwu.edu/.

2.14.c. Description of the processes that the school uses to verify that the student who registers in a distance education or correspondence education course or degree is the same student who participates in and completed the course or degree and receives the academic credit.

Both the MPH@GW and MHA@GW online programs utilize an integrated set of student recruitment, advising and course delivery services and technologies that allow program staff and faculty to establish regular web-camera based synchronous interaction with the student and track student progress. This one-on-one interaction takes place prior to enrollment in the “admission counseling” phase, through several online orientation sessions and throughout each week of the program in regular online class meetings, one-on-one Practicum and Culminating Experience advising, and all the way through to graduation. Unlike many distance programs, our focus on frequent student interaction using a webcam- based platform allows us to establish a relationship with each student and in turn, make the possibility of “fraudulent enrollment” a near impossibility. Throughout their time in the program, students are required to be on camera during all live, synchronous sessions with their instructor and peers throughout each week, course and term (students will have had a minimum of 450 of these live sessions where they appear live and on camera during their time in the program). Students are required to upload a picture during orientation to their public profile on the Learning Management System, which allows instructors, advisors, program staff and peers to verify each student’s identity. Attendance during live sessions is required and recorded each week for live class sessions. Students meet on-camera with their Academic Advisors, Practicum and CE Advisors, which allows for another level of verification of identity and from an academic integrity perspective, ensure that the student is producing original work products. For in-class examinations,

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 183 students are required to be on-camera for the duration of the examination, and the instructor (or a designated proctor) is present during the examinations to monitor this. Additionally, many of the live sessions and examinations are recorded and periodically reviewed by faculty/staff for this and other purposes.

Students also submit a copy of their government-issued photo ID or passport in order to receive their GWorld card (the student identification card). This gives us another verification tool to ensure that the name/picture of the person on the ID matches the student information on record as well as the person present in the weekly class sessions. Similar to in person class assignments, faculty may choose to run written work through plagiarism-detection software.

2.14.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The School has launched two highly successful online degree programs. • The live synchronous sessions are offered at various times and days for flexibility. • Faculty have received hours of training on how to “flip” the classroom. • Our location in DC has enabled us to record and archive interviews and School-sponsored events for classes. • Faculty are using some of the produced materials from the online programs in their residential classes. • Recruitment of both students and faculty from around the world.

Challenges: • The MPH@GW has experienced significant growth in a short time. Finding well-qualified session leaders is challenging in some disciplines. • Many of the residential students are seeking the flexibility of the online programs. • Course offerings are limited online because of production costs and time.

Future Plans: • Evaluating models for more flexibility to move between residential and online courses. • Potential of offering elective credits through other 2U programs through a consortium-type of agreement. • Potential to add another degree in collaboration with 2U.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 184 CRITERIA 3: CREATION, APPLICATION, AND ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE

3.1 RESEARCH. THE SCHOOL SHALL PURSUE AN ACTIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM, CONSISTENT WITH ITS MISSION, THROUGH WHICH ITS FACULTY AND STUDENTS CONTRIBUTE TO THE KNOWLEDGE BASE OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH DISCIPLINES, INCLUDING RESEARCH DIRECTED AT IMPROVING THE PRACTICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH.

3.1.a. Description of the school’s research activities, including policies, procedures and practices that support research and scholarly activities.

Overview: As part of the strategic planning process initiated by Dean Lynn Goldman, a Research Work Group conducted a situation analysis with SPH faculty in the spring of 2012 and subsequently made a series of recommendations, which led to hiring the School’s first nationally-recruited Associate Dean for Research. Additional Work Group recommendations resulted in new by-laws requiring a standing School-wide Research Committee (with faculty and student representation) serving in an advisory role to the Associate Dean for Research. Providing targeted research leadership in combination with elevating faculty and student engagement in research planning and decision-making were critical milestones in shifting the SPH research trajectory. The SPH faculty is passionate about finding solutions to today’s most critical public health problems. The research quests of our faculty often evolve into influential public health policy locally, nationally, and globally. Moreover, SPH’s drive for research excellence creates a vibrant culture of learning for our students. Students matriculate from all cultures and backgrounds, ready for an intellectual journey to new frontiers of public health research. Research mentorship by our faculty steers them through that journey.

The strategic research goals include:

• Fostering a culture of research excellence capacity building, collaboration, and collegiality; • Increasing and rewarding externally funded research; • Enhancing the SPH scholarly output; • Elevating the visibility of SPH research; • Increasing the public health impact of SPH research; and • Cultivating PhD and Post-Doctoral multidisciplinary training platforms.

The SPH research philosophy is one of collaboration and engagement, centered on research that translates into real-world policy and practice. Our researchers work hand-in-hand with a diverse group of academic, community, private, and government partners to identify unmet public health needs; to test innovative prevention models and strategies; and to evaluate public health initiatives to ensure that they are effective and sustainable in the communities that will benefit the most.

Our major thematic foci include:

• Health Policy and Healthcare Reform; • HIV/AIDS and Other Infectious Diseases; • Environment and Health;

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 185 • Healthy Societies Across the Lifespan, with concentrations in obesity prevention, tobacco control, and physical activity; and • Cross-cutting innovative methodologies (such as social marketing and mHealth technologies).

1. Leadership, Administration, and Infrastructure Established in 2012 and led by Associate Dean for Research Kimberly Horn (appointed June, 2012), service leadership is the cornerstone of the SPH Office of Research Excellence (ORE). ORE strives for high quality and high efficiency in the preparation and submission and post-award management of grant applications across all six departments, in collaboration with the George Washington University (GW) Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR). Our overriding purpose is to deliver an efficient and flexible research infrastructure that stimulates productivity and encourages research synergy not only across our SPH departments, but also throughout the School. Under the supervision of the Associate Dean for Research, the ORE also includes a Senior Research Operations Director, two Pre-Award Specialists, and four OVPR-designated pre- and post-award staff. For details, refer to ERF 3.1.a.: SPH Grants Management Positions.

As shown in the chart, each of the six academic departments has at least one grants management staff member who interfaces with SPH ORE research operations. To strengthen capacity across the SPH, the ORE initiated a Grants Management Administrators (GMA) Learning Community in 2013 to promote learning and cooperation among the SPH grants management personnel. The Senior Research Operations Director leads the Learning Community, which meets monthly to discuss timely research-related topics both internal and external to the SPH. Additionally, for training purposes, outside speakers are invited to present on a variety of research administration topics. Past speakers have discussed procurement, electronic routing, hiring, export control, post-award administration, and GW’s PI Dashboard. The ORE provides yearly training awards to administrators to attend national and regional professional meetings (National Council of University Research Administrators). We also provide financial support for personnel to attend and enroll in the Certified Research Administrator (CRA) training. The SPH staff has increased from zero to eight CRAs since 2013. To qualify for the training and development awards, candidates must apply and are required to orally present a topic from the professional meeting/training to the Learning Community. The Learning Community budget, including training, is approximately $10K annually (not including the salaries/efforts of ORE and other SPH staff). The Senior Research Operations Director oversees and communicates regularly through the Learning Community listserv and provides timely updates on GW research-related events and policies, SPH research presentations and critical announcements from the funding community.

Of note, the ORE works closely with the SPH Finance Director (whose staff, for continuity, also attend the Learning Community meetings) as well as the new SPH Associate Director for Graduate Assistantships, Scholarships and Financial Aid where financial aid and fellowships intersect with graduate research training.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 186 2. Pre- and Post-Award Operations a. Shared Pre-Award Model. In order to ensure consistency of service and support across all departments, the Associate Dean for Research developed a centralized pre-award operations model. The “shared services” model provides support from school-level Pre-Award Specialists when departmental resources alone are not adequate to submit a proposal in a timely manner, including when late breaking opportunities appear. The shared services team (which now includes two Pre- Award Specialists) is highly responsive, with quick turnarounds for assigning team members to PIs to complete applications. The team specializes in Center grants, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts, or other large complex proposals, and last minute grant opportunities. The team also provides temporary support to departments with staff on extended leave or vacation. Other services include, but are not limited to, partial assistance on proposals, technical assistance with proposal submission, and routing for internal review. The shared services model is intended to enhance faculty satisfaction in the school’s pre-award services and proposal development. The School’s leadership is evaluating the potential to provide post-award administration in a shared services model as well.

b. Fast Track Process. As part of the ORE’s responsiveness to PI issues, needs, and opportunities, we instituted a Fast Track proposal submission and routing process for opportunities that arise from late breaking requests for proposals. These requests often occur in the context of IDIQ task awards, international project opportunities, or funding for emergent public health crises. Working closely with OVPR, Fast Track is intended to streamline and supplement departmental administrative resources, reduce institutional review time, and assure responsiveness to the sponsor’s requests (which are often unique, complex, or even vague) as quickly as possible.

c. Post-Award Management/ Assessment. In 2014, ORE conducted an informal needs assessment for the purpose of identifying distinct post-award phases and associated challenges within the SPH. The major outcomes identified resulted from group and individual discussions between the SPH faculty, staff, and leadership; the SPH Research Committee; and OVPR, over several months (~June, 2014-December, 2014). In summary, within five distinct post-award processes at GW (Intake; Negotiation; Set-up; Management; and Closeout), the SPH has targeted improvement in the following areas: a) Resolution of financial conflict of interest (FCOI); b) Award notification/communication; c) IRB approval efficiencies; d) Award negotiation with sponsors; e) Prime award set-up; f) Sub-award/sub-contract set up; g) GRAs and research staff hiring; h) Communication between SPH Department Administrators and PIs; i) Award Closeout; and j) Resolution of Labor Distribution/Effort. The SPH and OVPR continue to work together and several key GW initiatives are already underway to further our post-award operations. For examples, refer to: https://research.gwu.edu/improvement-initiatives.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 187 3. Proposal Development and Research Resources Managed by ORE, an open-access, web-based portal was created in 2013 in response to faculty requests for easier proposal preparation. The portal provides a variety of resources that include templates (e.g., data sharing plans and facilities and resources pages tailored to each department), time management tools, and budget calculators. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/research/proposal-and-resources-portal.

4. Research Policies and Procedure In addition to a new SPH Research Operations Handbook developed to lead investigators through the key processes of proposal and grants management at GW, over a dozen new SPH research policy/procedures have been implemented since ORE was established in 2012. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/research/policy-procedure-guidance. Key to providing efficiency and structure, all policies and procedural guidance documents are posted to the open-access research portal on the SPH website to promote ease of access and use, clear communication, and transparency regarding expectations and resources. ORE also established a variety of committees and work groups designed to enhance research operations and compliance, including the SPH Research Committee (a standing committee in the SPH by-laws, est. 2012); SPH Compliance and Ethics Committee (est. 2015); SPH International Research Task Force (est. 2015); Student IRB Liaison Work Group (est. 2014); HIPAA Compliance Committee and SPH standardized training (est. 2014); and Responsible Conduct of Research Workgroup (est. 2014).

5. Research Communications The ORE uses the SPH website, including the research portal, as one means of communication with faculty, staff, and students. We also promote and inform through the SPH weekly faculty and staff newsletter. In Spring 2013 the SPH Research Accelerator blog was created, with input from SPH faculty and hosted by the Associate Dean for Research, to provide another central mechanism of communication. This blog supports and celebrates research excellence at our School by sharing updates on our research and our investigators; weekly funding alerts organized by department relevance; musings on timely topics (e.g., grant writing tips and research affairs); and upcoming events and trainings. Ultimately, the Research Accelerator is an indirect ‘mentoring’ technique to equip investigators with current resources and to promote communication, collaboration, and success. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/blogs/researchaccelerator/about-the-blog/.

6. Research Advancement Programs The SPH Research Committee and Dean Horn proposed a new SPH Research Advancement Program to Dean Goldman in Spring 2014 to enhance the research excellence across the SPH. The multi- component program facilitates the achievement of three of the School’s strategic research objectives: to foster a culture of research excellence through capacity building, collaboration, and collegiality; to

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 188 increase and reward externally funded research conducted at the SPH; and to enhance the scholarly output of the SPH. Managed by the SPH ORE, the program includes eight primary components: 1) an intensive Boot Camp; 2) PI Summits; 3) an on-going special topics Seminar Series; 4) a Facilitating Funds Program; 5) a tailored Mentoring Program for new faculty; 6) Networking Events; 7) Scientific Writing and Presentation Workshops; and 8) streamlined Motivation and Incentive Mechanisms. The program is currently fully funded by the SPH endowments with a proposed annual budget of ~$250,000

As part of the Facilitating Funds component, the School launched the inaugural Springboard Grants Program, Pathways to NIH Funding, in Spring 2014 with the goal of rapidly growing the research success of our faculty in competitive, externally funded grants. The Springboard Pathways (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/downloads/research/springboard_pathways_rfa.pdf) RFA is focused specifically on developing grantsmanship in pursuit of NIH R21 and R01 funding. Future RFAs will have different foci. Full-time active status faculty in the SPH are eligible to apply; this includes regular and research track faculty at the rank of assistant, associate and full professor. This unique program provides awardees each with $50K pilot awards, along with simultaneous grantsmanship training and intensive tailored mentoring led by Dean Horn. The end result is a highly vetted, competitive NIH proposal. One NIH proposal has already been submitted and the two others are scheduled. Learn about the first three Springboard Grants recipients (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/three-milken-institute-sph-faculty-receive-first-springboard- grants). See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/research/faculty-research- development#springboard grants.

Pilot funding is also available to our faculty through a variety of other GW funding sources. Refer to Table 1.1.d. for details.

7. Research Computing Services a. Strongbox data storage. To meet the SPH’s increasing need for secure high-speed data analysis, data storage, and collaborative data sharing, the SPH ORE and Department of IT developed and established a state-of-the-art infrastructure. Launched in Spring 2014, this new service includes nine software packages (STATA/MP 13, IBM SPSS Statistics Standard Edition v22, ArcGIS, MPlus Qualtics Research Suite, SAS 9.4, EndnoteX7, Adobe Creative Suite 6, Nvivo 10, Atlas Ti7); VPN and Onsite network access; storage capacity, (2) 128GB RAM, dual Intel Xeon E5-2650 2.00GHz, 20M Cache, 8.0GT/s QPI, Turbo, 8C processors servers; 36T SAN. StrongBox provides a comprehensive suite of the most current analytical software applications and a secure centrally managed, cloud-based data storage service for faculty, graduate students, and post-doctoral fellows. Researchers may use the system to: (a) store and preserve their research data for both future research and to provide “training” datasets for students; (b) work with both small and large-scale research datasets; and (c) collaborate more effectively on research with colleagues and students across schools and

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 189 departments. All instructions are provided on the research portal (see more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/research/shared-data-platform-strong-box).

b. Colonial One data analysis service. To meet the research needs of high-performance computing for ‘big data’ analysis, GW recently implemented a new, shared high-performance computing cluster named Colonial One, which is housed in one of GW's two enterprise-class datacenters and also on the Virginia Science and Technology Campus. Professional staff in the GW Research Services Group, within the Division of Information Technology, manages this system with assistance from GW- sponsored computational staff in the Computational Biology Institute and the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. Access to Colonial One is open to the GW community. The SPH contracted usage of Colonial One for our investigators, which includes 24-hour on-premise and remote environment monitoring, with hourly staff walk-throughs; redundant power distribution including UPS (battery) and emergency generator backup; redundant cooling systems utilizing a dedicated chilled water plant and a glycol refrigeration system; and direct network connectivity to GW’s robust 100 Gigabit fiber optic network. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/research/shared-data-platform-strong-box.

8. Organized Thematic Research Units The SPH is committed to creating and maintaining Organized Research Units (ORUs) that meet the highest standards of research and practice, are actively engaged in multi-disciplinary scholarship as described in the SPH and the university strategic plans, and convey GW’s commitment to innovation to the outside world. The process and the procedures for SPH ORU can be found in the SPH Policy for Establishing Organized Research Units. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/downloads/research/SPHHS_Organized_Research_Units.pdf. To that end, the SPH ORUs include a variety of institutes, centers, programs, and cores. The following ORUs are currently aligned with Milken Institute School of Public Health:

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 190 Table 3.1.a.: SPH Organized Thematic Research Units Institutes and Centers Chartered by SPH Director Center: Biostatistics Center Elizabeth Thom, PhD Center for Health Policy Research Leighton Ku, PhD Center for HIV/AIDS Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health Laboratory Alan E. Greenberg, MD, MPH GW Center for Global Health James Tielsch, PhD Center for Social Well Being and Development (CSWD) Mark Edberg, PhD GW Workforce Development Institute Polly Pittman, PhD The DC Metro Tobacco Research and Instruction Consortium (MeTRIC) Kimberly Horn, EdD Non-chartered Signature Centers: Avance Center Mark Edberg, PhD Antibiotic Resistance Action Center Lance Price, PhD Center for Health and Health Care in Schools Olga Acosta Price, PhD Center for Risk Science and Public Health George Gray, PhD DC Developmental Center for AIDS Research (DC-CFAR) Alan E. Greenberg, MD, MPH Sumner M Redstone Global Center for Prevention and Wellness William Dietz, PhD Programs: Jacobs Institute of Women's Health Susan Wood, PhD Geiger Gibson Program in Community Health Policy Peter Shin, PhD, MPH Hirsh Health Law and Policy Program Joel Teitelbaum, JD, LLM Integrated Behavioral Health Policy Program Eric Goplerud, PhD mWellness Development and Optimization Program Lorien Abroms, ScD Cores: Biostatistics and Epidemiology Consulting Service (BECS) Sam Simmens, PhD

9. Institutional Infrastructure—The GW Office of Vice President for Research The SPH works closely and collaboratively with the GW Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR), particularly the Office of Sponsored Projects to ensure successful submission of proposals and compliance throughout the life of the project. This relationship also helps link our departments with the research related services offered by the GW Division of IT (http://it.gwu.edu/research-computing), Grants and Contracts Accounting Services (http://comptroller.gwu.edu/gcas), the GW Libraries (http://libguides.gwu.edu/data-management), and more. Central to this collaborative relationship with the OVPR is the Sponsored Projects Team that is assigned specifically to the SPH to support research. Physically located in the SPH ORE, the Office of Sponsored Projects Administrators (SPAs), see ERF 3.1.a.: Grants Management Positions, serve as central resources to guide and steward SPH faculty and student investigators, and administrators. SPAs are responsible for the effective and timely handling of research proposals, as well as the preparation, interpretation, negotiation, and execution of agreements on behalf of GW for projects funded by federal and state agencies, foundations, and other public and private sources.

Additionally, the ORE works hand-in-hand with the Office of Human Research, including the IRB, for faculty and student research. Beginning fall 2015, the SPH appointed a faculty member as a new Student IRB and Research Liaison to provide critical linkage between our students and the IRB. The position helps students to navigate the IRB process while promoting learning and turn-around time. Under the

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 191 leadership of the GW Associate Vice President for Research, in tandem regular communication with the Associate Deans for Research throughout University, the GW OVPR provides numerous additional resources and initiatives that benefit the SPH research mission. See more at: http://research.gwu.edu/.http://research.gwu.edu/.

3.1.b. Description of current research undertaken in collaboration with local, state, national or international health agencies and community-based organizations. Formal research agreements with such agencies should be identified.

1. Composition As illustrated in the figure below and delineated in CEPH Data Template 3.1.1 (ERF 3.1.c.: CEPH Data Template 3.1.1 Research Activity), our research reflects a diverse portfolio of federal, private, and state and local level funding.

• Local/state, including community-based collaborations: Between FY12-FY14, we were awarded over 70 (8% of the total portfolio) projects from state level sources*, most of which involved partnerships with state health departments. Demonstrating our SPH research involvement in our DC community, 50% of these projects included funding from the DC Department of Health. Various levels of community engagement are common across our funded research activities, regardless of the funding source. *For this purpose, the District of Columbia is considered a state.

Additionally, several of our thematic FY 2012-FY2015 Proportion of Funding by ORUs (see ERF 3.1.a.: SPH Grants Category Management Positions), focus specifically on health disparities in the Fed-NIH Fed-Other Private State DC community, including the DC Center 4% For Aids Research, which was competitively renewed with a five-year NIH grant in the amount of $7.5M in 22% April, 2015.

50% 24%

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 192

• National. Almost half of our overall portfolio was awarded from federal sources during this reporting period, targeting populations ranging from the DC community, to rural West Virginia, Alabama, to California. SPH investigators continue to perform pivotal work in conducting research and evaluation that informs policies, regulations, and strategies enacted by The Healthcare Reform Act, CMS/Medicare/Medicaid, the CDC, USAID, HRSA and the FDA. Currently, we operate six federally-funded centers. Funding sources include NIH, HRSA, and CDC.

• International. The SPH has numerous projects with an international focus. Although we have an emergent Center for Global Research within the Department of Global Health, many of our departments have global research Dollars in Funding Category by Year initiatives. From Mongolia to Kenya to 25000000 Egypt, much of our international research 20000000 includes public health workforce 15000000 development, FY12 evaluation and training FY13 components in 10000000 underserved, FY14 impoverished regions. $ Amoung Dollar FY15 Refer to Criteria 3.1.c. 5000000 below. 0 Fed-NIH Fed-Other Private State

Category of Funding

2. Special arrangements, such as IDIQs

Between 2012-2015 SPH served as prime on four IDIQ's and one IDIQ sub-award through a partnering organization. The largest Program Support Center (PSC) IDIQ serves any HHS agency and includes a range of topics. Most of the IDIQ's with the PSC are from the Offices of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Assistant Secretary for Health, the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology and Administration on Children and Families. Although the CDC Office of Associate Director for Policy oversees the Achieving Public Health Impact Thru Policy IDIQ, it can provide projects from any CDC office. A major focus is on policy aspects of CDC activities and may include both domestic and international issues. The Medicaid and CHIP Policy Impact and Evaluation IDIQ are affiliated with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and are mostly Medicaid and CHIP focused. These contracts are related to assistance to states in Medicaid transformations. A HRSA IDIQ serves

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 193 community health centers, maternal and child health or the Ryan White program. All IDIQs are housed in the Department of Health Policy and Management.

3.1.c. A list of current research activity of all primary faculty identified in Criterion 4.1.a., including amount and source of funds, for each of the last three years. These data must be presented in table format and include at least the following information organized by department, specialty area or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school: a) principal investigator, b) project name, c) period of funding, d) source of funding, e) amount of total award, f) amount of current year’s award, g) whether research is community based, and h) whether research provides for student involvement. See CEPH Data Template 3.1.1; only research funding should be reported here. Extramural funding for service or training/continuing education grants should be reported in Template 3.2.2 (funded service) or Template 3.3.1 (funded training/workforce development), respectively.

Refer to ERF 3.1.c.: CEPH Data Template 3.1.1 Research Activity for overall research funding. We do not currently have a specific code that captures “community-based” funding. However, a significant number of grants in our portfolio directly include community partners or serve communities. As described in Criteria 3.1.b above, our work with state level health departments is a meaningful proxy of research that influences local level policy and practice. To evaluate public health education and workforce grants, we performed a key word search in our awards database (using “training, “education”, “technical assistance” and “workforce”) to capture the number of projects by funding category. The results are presented in Table 3.1.c. below.

Table 3.1.c.: SPH Workforce Training/Education/TA Grants and Contracts Funding Source Count AY 2012-13 47 Fed-NIH 5 Fed- Other 20 Private 20 State 2 AY 2013-14 33 Fed-NIH 3 Fed- Other 13 Private 17 State 0 AY 2014-15 32 Fed-NIH 4 Fed- Other 14 Private 14 State 0

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 194 3.1.d. Identification of measures by which the school may evaluate the success of its research activities, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. For example, schools may track dollar amounts of research funding, significance of findings (eg, citation references), extent of research translation (eg, adoption by policy or statute), dissemination (eg, publications in peer-reviewed publications, presentations at professional meetings) and other indicators.

1. Research Funding The SPH tracks the conventional data-driven measures of research success, including proposals submitted, success rates, direct and indirect costs, and faculty effort coverage. (See Table: Conventional Measures of Research Success.) The SPH established its first Research Blueprint in 2012, following strategic planning by the deans and chairs of the School, with input from the Research Committee and faculty. The Blueprint (ERF 3.1.d.: Research Blueprint) aligns specific objectives with the School’s strategic research goals. The activities and associated achievements for each objective are shown in the Blueprint as they relate to the SPH strategic goals.

Table 3.1.d.1: Conventional Measures of Research Success FY Total Expend Indirect Costs Direct Costs PIs1 Proposals ($M) ($M) ($M) (#) Submitted2 (#)

FY10 $33 $4 $29 83 203

FY11 $35 $4 $31 80 212 FY12 $41 $5 $36 86 224 FY13 $39 $5 $34 87 228

FY14 $39 $5 $34 98 221

FY 15 $43 $7 $36 90 235

1 PIs often hold more than one award. 2 This number reflects new proposals, supplements and non-competitive renewals.

• As presented in the table, the number of proposals submitted has generally increased since FY10, as have the total expenditures, including direct and indirect costs.

• The number of funded PIs has also steadily increased over the past five years. Between FY12- FY14, the school held 892 awards with 126 faculty members serving as PIs.

• The school’s proposal success rate (#awards/#proposals) has averaged approximately 45%-50% over the past three fiscal years. Note that the tracking methods of the School’s Office of Vice President of Research includes in this rate proposals that were submitted and awarded simultaneously, supplemental awards given to an existing proposal, and other non-competitive award mechanisms.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 195 2. Peer-reviewed publications An additional measure of success includes dissemination of research results through peer-reviewed publications. In 2012, our faculty published 251 articles; in 2013 we published 270 articles; and in 2014 we published 254 articles.

3. Research translation and influence on policy A less quantitative measure of research productivity, but one that we value highly, is the translation of our scholarship into effects on policy and practice. In the past year, faculty have contributed in significant ways to national and regulatory dialogue on key public health issues. A few examples follow; there are many others.

• On April 9, 2015 the White House held a roundtable working session on education and climate change, which was attended by Dean Lynn Goldman, PHD, MS, MPH, and Melissa Perry, ScD, MHS, Professor and Chair of the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, as well as deans and leaders from 30 medical, public health and nursing schools from across the country. The roundtable is part of a long list of actions unveiled by the White House aimed at highlighting the health impacts of climate change and encouraging data sharing. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/dean-lynn-goldman-and-eoh-chair-melissa-perry- participate-white-house-roundtable-climate.

• New Report: Community Health Center Data Capture Incomplete in Electronic Health Record Systems, Potentially Affecting Reimbursement. A new study raises fundamental questions about how to quantify and reimburse the true value of care associated with the community health center model. The report, from the Geiger Gibson/RCHN Community Health Foundation Research Collaborative, based at the SPH, assesses the feasibility and usefulness of combining electronic health record (EHR) information with federal cost report data as the basis for developing or evaluating reimbursement rates for community health centers. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/new-report-community-health-center-data-capture- incomplete-electronic-health-record-systems.

• Lance B. Price, PhD, Professor of environmental and occupational health, participated in a press briefing held on Capitol Hill to announce the re-introduction of a bill, Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (H.R. 1552), by Rep. Louise Slaughter, (D-NY). The briefing was held on Tuesday, March 24, 2015. The legislation would ban the non-therapeutic use of eight important classes of antibiotics in factory farms; large livestock operations that routinely feed healthy animals low doses of antibiotics. The practice allows farming operations to keep animals in crowded, unsanitary conditions. The resulting “superbugs” can spread and cause drug- resistant infections in humans. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about two million Americans acquire a drug resistant infection every year with about 23,000 of those dying. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/professor-lance-price- participates-congressional-briefing-legislation-aimed-preserving.

• On April 15, 2015, Amita Vyas, PhD, MHS, Associate Professor of prevention and community health and director of the Maternal and Child Health program at the SPH, was invited to speak before the Senate Democratic Caucus on education and economic empowerment of women and girls globally at the US Capitol. This roundtable discussion was designed to be a candid

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 196 conversation and an opportunity to discuss solutions with Senators. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/professor-amita-vyas-speaks-senate-democratic- caucus-global-empowerment-women-girls.

• Loretta DiPietro, PhD, MPH, Professor and Chair of the Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, PhD, MPH, published a commentary April 6, 2015 on the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) website as part of the IOM’s Perspective Series connected to its Roundtable on Obesity Solutions. Dr. DiPietro points out that physiologic function and resiliency decline with age, even among the most robust of older adults; however that decline can be significantly minimized by maintaining an active lifestyle. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/iom- publishes-commentary-physical-activity-older-people.

• On April 3, 2015, Fitzhugh Mullan, MD, Murdock Head Professor of Medicine and Health Policy and Mary Ellsberg, PhD, MA, Professor of Global Health gave talks at the TEDx Foggy Bottom event. Ellsberg’s talk focused on domestic violence against women while Mullan zeroed in on reforms in medical education and ways that such reform could lead to better health for all. See more at: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/tedx-talk-gw-campus-features-professors- mullan-and-ellsberg.

• Women's Health Issues, the peer-reviewed journal of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health, publishes original research, systematic review articles, and commentaries on women's health care and policy. It is the top-ranked women's studies journal (out of 41). Recent research articles have addressed implications of differing mammography screening guidelines for higher-risk populations; workplace accommodations for breastfeeding mothers; the health of post- menopausal women veterans; and the economic burden of Alzheimer's Disease on women and men. Topics of recent commentaries include the role of Planned Parenthood in healthcare for low-income women; unanswered research questions for women's heart health; Medicaid and women's health; legal impediments to midwifery; and trauma-informed primary care. See more at: http://www.whijournal.com/.

• The School is also committed to influencing policy through dissemination of policy briefs and white papers. From 2012 – spring of 2015, our faculty published 135 such reports.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 197 Table 3.1.d.2. Assessment of Success of Research Activities Outcome Measure Target AY2012-13 AY2013-14 AY2014-15 Publications in SCOPUS 250 251 270 254 Number of submitted 200 197 192 188 new, unique proposals* Proposal success rate, Overall = 40% 45% 49% 40% overall and by funding Fed NIH = 25% 24% 31% 20% source Fed Other = 35% 35% 38% 40% Private = 50% 61% 63% 53% State = 50% 75% 50% 50% Increase number of active N=350 Awards N=281 Awards N=285 Awards N=323 Awards awards across ranks. Professor=150 Professor=144 Professor=124 Professor=149 Assoc. Assoc. Assoc. Assoc. Professor=100 Professor=77 Professor=85 Professor=85 Assist. Assist. Assist. Assist. Professor=60 Professor=32 Professor=41 Professor=52 Other/Res. Other/Res. Other/Res. Other/Res. Scientist=40 Scientist=28 Scientist=35 Scientist=40 Increase direct and $40M $41M $39M $39M indirect funding across ($36M, Direct; ($34M, Direct; ($34M, Direct; departments (from $33M, $5M IDC) $5M IDC) $5M IDC) AY 2010-11)

Increase NIH funding NIH NIH NIH NIH $10M/Annual Funding=$6.4M Funding=$8.7M Funding=$9.8M GRAs and Post-Docs 10 GRAs 11 11 11 supported with external funding 6 Post Docs 4 6 8

* This number differs from Table 3.1.d.a as that number represents all submitted proposals, including supplements and renewals.

3.1.e. Description of student involvement in research.

Between 2012-2014 funded research supported approximately 36 FTEs for SPH students, spanning 126 projects (see Template 3.1.1). Historically, the SPH relied on staff wage positions (instead of GRAs) to support and train students. Starting in summer of 2014, we began new initiatives to increase GRA training and funding.

Beyond GRA support, our students are engaged in a myriad of research endeavors including:

• Research-driven practica, CEs, and internships at GW, in DC, and beyond;

• GW Research Days. Each year SPH students present work at the university-wide research event. Abstracts from the past three years can be found at: http://research.gwu.edu/research-days-2015 (n=27 students) https://research.gwu.edu/research-days-2014-0 (n=39 students)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 198 http://research.gwu.edu/research-days-2013 (n=41 students) SPH faculty mentorship is a requirement for participation; and

• Faculty-mentored publications and presentations at national meetings. For example, at the 2015 National Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, nine SPH graduate students had accepted abstracts. Our students also regularly present abstracts at the APHA and other public health conferences.

3.1.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Organized the Office of Research Excellence, under new Associate Dean for Research. • Convened a newly charged and re-vamped SPH Research Committee, including student representatives. • Developed a prioritized, strategic research plan through the SPH Research Blueprint. • Formed a SPH Learning Community for the school’s grant management administrators. • Launched the School’s Faculty Research Advancement Program. • Established critical new policies and guidance to facilitate pre- and post-award operations. • Established an on-line SPH Research web portal. • Created a pre-award shared services model to assist departments with proposal development. • Secured new long-term, reliable wet and dry laboratory space for research and classrooms. • Established and formalized a Biostatistics Consulting Core and other shared resources, such as StrongBox. • Established the SPH Research Accelerator ~ with a blog and informative content. • Growth and diversity of the research portfolio. • Proximity and access to promote multidisciplinary collaboration through the new buildings. • New and innovative resources to train, prepare, motivate and incentivize research: o A new SPH Faculty Research Advancement Program that includes the Springboard pilot project funding mechanism, grant writing workshops, funders’ presentations, Mentor Match peer-review program, grant-related workshops and trainings, and award management trainings. • High level assurances for compliance: o Created a school-level Conflict of Interest and Ethics committee. o Availability of modules for responsible conduct of research. o Student IRB liaison and enhanced SPH representation on the IRB. o Standardized HIPAA training for SPH. • Data management resources o Developed “Strongbox,” a customized server for SPH researchers that provides a comprehensive suite of analytical software applications and secure centrally managed data storage. o Partnership with the Colonial One Big Data server.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 199 Challenges: • Increasing student engagement in future SPH Research Days. • Shifting from Research Assistant and “wage” research positions to graduate research assistantships, fellowships, and postdocs. • Increasing student research scholarships. • Improving post-award services. • Utilizing upgrades in the university’s PI Dashboard to create PI-specific metrics that can assist with the identification of PIs who can benefit from mentoring and additional support in securing research funding. • Tracking various levels of collaborations, student involvement, cultural diversity, community- based research outreach, etc. • Developing a method to specifically identify community-based research as this is integrated throughout much of our portfolio. • Improved tracking of scholarship and impact. • Occupying and managing new research laboratory/facilities in the SEH.

Future Plans: • Fully implement the multi-component Research Advancement Program. • Develop innovative doctoral and post-doctoral training programs. • Increase GRA availability and student-faculty mentorship and training. • Continue to work with OVPR to create more efficient and transparent post-award systems. • Increase the number of high impact manuscripts and presentations. • Explore relevant research cores and shared resources. • Expand multidisciplinary research collaborations across GW. • Create a SPH Biosafety Committee. • Set and track specific goals for IDC Recovery. • Create a biblioinformatics system to track scholarship and impact.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 200 3.2. SERVICE. THE SCHOOL SHALL PURSUE ACTIVE SERVICE ACTIVITIES, CONSISTENT WITH ITS MISSION, THROUGH WHICH FACULTY AND STUDENTS CONTRIBUTE TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE.

Service to all people is one of the core values of our School, as presented in the strategic planning document and in alliance with the University values.

3.2.a. Description of the school’s service activities, including policies, procedures and practice that support service. If the school has formal contracts or agreements with external agencies, these should be noted.

The School provides service to the university, the community and other organizations in numerous ways: by providing convening space and hosting time sensitive panels and discussion forums; through service on local, national and international boards; through community and university outreach and public health education; and by participating in capacity building efforts internationally. Service activities can be divided into a few distinct categories: service to the university; service to professional organizations; and service to communities.

1. Service to the University includes: • Providing broad public health education to the entire GW undergraduate student body. • Offering various exercise classes to GW faculty and staff free of charge. • Providing expert input on public health issues such as student suicide, ebola, synthetic turf, and others. • Serving on university committees. 2. Service to professional organizations includes: • Directly advising government agencies and other policy-making bodies. • Serving on various formal advisory boards. • Providing convening space and leadership on critical public health issues such as gun violence, use of PREP for HIV, breast cancer and the environment. • Editorial positions on journals. • Participation in national academies, boards, roundtables. 3. Service to communities, including local, national and global, includes: • Service on study sections. • Offering bone density and body scans to the local community. • Working with the DC government on a myriad of initiatives. • Working collaboratively with organizations such as EGPAF, APHL, USAID. • Developing community-based centers such as AVANCE. • Sending personnel to crisis areas such as Haiti, West Africa. • Supporting local AIDS walk and homeless shelters/food kitchens. • Serving on advisory groups for community organizations. • Providing in-kind organizational development and health education programming to DC clinics, hospitals, schools, community-based organizations, and public housing campuses.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 201 3.2.b. Description of the emphasis given to community and professional service activities in the promotion and tenure process.

The Milken Institute SPH Appointments, Promotion and Tenure (APT) guidelines specifically identify service as a key area considered in appointment, promotion and tenure decisions. Service is defined in our APT guidelines to be service to the department and service to the School or University, as well as public service to the government and/or private entities. Excerpted from SPH APT guidelines: VII. Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Criteria; Consideration of Public Health Practice A. Education, Scholarship, and Service 1. Appointment and Promotion a. In tenure-accruing positions. Appointment or promotion in tenure-accruing positions shall be dependent upon professional achievement in education, scholarship, and service. The candidate must be assessed as excellent in each applicable area. b. In non-tenure-accruing positions. Appointment or promotion in non-tenure accruing positions (regular or research) shall be dependent upon professional achievement in education, scholarship, service. For appointment or promotion in a regular faculty category, the candidate must be assessed as very good to excellent in education and service, with some evidence of activity expected in the area of scholarship. For appointment or promotion in a research faculty category, the candidate must be assessed as very good to excellent in scholarship, with some evidence of activity expected in service and education, including teaching and mentoring. 2. Tenure Tenure is awarded based on evidence that the individual’s contribution to education, scholarship, and service is of such magnitude as to merit an award of tenure because of the current and future benefit to the University that would result.

B. Education, Scholarship and Service – Definitions 3. Service a. Service to a Department is expected as part of a faculty member’s membership in the Department. Service to a Department is necessary but by itself is not sufficient evidence for advancement. In connection with promotion and tenure, service denotes service to the SPH and the University. The concept of service also encompasses professional and public service to professional societies and associations, government agencies, and public and private bodies engaged in public health practice and policy. Service, as distinguished from public health practice, denotes activities involving no, or nominal, compensation and undertaken without significant extramural support. At least some evidence

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 202 of departmental and/or professional/public service also is expected of research faculty. b. The following activities would be considered evidence of service to the School or University: i. Membership on standing or ad hoc committees at the School or University levels; ii. Participation in formal School, or University-wide student activities such as orientation or career development programs; iii. Formal mentorship of junior faculty; iv. Contributions to the administrative management of the SPH, or University; and v. Participation in events that develop and advance the School or University (e.g., public health grand rounds, faculty development activities, and similar events). c. Public service to governmental or private entities such as:

i. Expert consultation to governmental bodies, health care organizations and institutions, professional organizations and societies, community organizations, and similar bodies; ii. Membership on selection committees for awards or fellowships; iii. Participation in the planning of major professional society or organizational activities (e.g., membership on an annual conference planning committee); iv. Participation without, or at nominal, compensation in health education and health promotion or public health preparedness activities for the general public or at-risk populations; v. Congressional or agency testimony, briefings, and formal presentations; vi. Identification and coordination of responses to health needs in the surrounding communities, the District, and the nation, including increasing public awareness of disease prevention and health maintenance, organizing the provision of continuing education to practicing health care professionals, and devising strategies to provide health care to underserved and underfinanced populations; vii. Leadership in national/international groups dealing with public health practice, public health and health care policy, and health care administration; and, viii. Leadership and active participation in continuing education to health professionals at the local, regional, or national level.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 203

3.2.c. A list of the school’s current service activities, including identification of the community, organization, agency or body for which the service was provided and the nature of the activity, over the last three years. See CEPH Template 3.2.1. Projects presented in Criterion 3.1 should not be replicated here without distinction. Funded service activities may be reported in a separate table see CEPH Data Template 3.2.2. Extramural funding for research or training/continuing education grants should be reported in Template 3.1.1 (research) and 3.3.1 (funded workforce development), respectively.

Detailed lists of self-reported faculty service, extracted from the Annual Faculty Reports from 2012 – April 2015, are included in ERF 3.2.c.: Faculty Service. Faculty service is divided in these reports into five different categories for ease of review, including; Community and Other Service; Consulting; Editorial Boards and Reviews; Presentations; and Media Contributions.” Some examples of service are included in the table below. We do not capture information on those service activities that our faculty members perform privately, such as church service, local community or school service.

Table 3.2.c.: Service activity categories and selected examples Community and Consulting Editorial and Review Media Contributions Other Service Boards GW Urban Food Community Journal of www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/n Task Force Health Charities Development ews/2013/flame-retardants-declining of the National Economics Capital Area Hope Clinic American Nurse Journal of the Institute https://sanitationupdates.wordpress.com/201 (Fairfax, VA) Credentialing of Medicine, Tribuvan 3/03/25/pit-latrines-and-their-impacts-on- Center University groundwater-quality-a-systematic-review/

Haiti Medical Centro de Public Health Reports www.uvm.edu/vq/?Page=news&storyID=1 Missions Derechos del (Associate Editor) 7393&category=vqafocus Migrante (CDM) Dogs on North American Health Affairs http://planetforward.org/2012/10/18/the Deployment Fetal Therapy -debate-on-fracking-and-climate-change/ Network

DC Waste Abaris Group Practice Based http://thesocietypages.org/sociologylens/ Diversion Research to improve 2013/05/30/the-personal-is-political- Project Self Management investigating-the-environmental-breast- Support [PRISMS] cancer-movement/

Study section(s) Legacy NCI Tobacco Control http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/1 for NIH & other International Monograph 2/17/251950362/how-the-u-s-helped-to- funding fight-the-global-aids-epidemic agencies

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 204

Table 3.2.c.: Service activity categories and selected examples, (continued) Community and Consulting Editorials Boards and Media Contributions Other Service Review Engineers W/O National AAAS Fellowship http://www.lymphoma.org/site/pp.asp?c= Borders Academy of bkLTKaOQLmK8E&b=8596757 Medicine

Health Office of the Health Education and http://news.discovery.com/human/health Datapalooza National Behavior Special Issue: /active-video-games-can-battle-childhood- Coordinator for Evidence for Policy and obesity-130108.htm Environmental Health Approaches to Information Promoting Health Technology

Beacon House Community Journal of Family http://yourhealthtalk.org/health-care- Youth Sports Health Charities Psychology panel-discussion-yht-in-dc/ Program of the National Capital Area, Inc.

3.2.d. Identification of the measures by which the school may evaluate the success of its service efforts, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years.

Table 3.2.d: Outcome measures by which the school may evaluate the success of its service efforts Outcome measure Target AY 2013 AY 2014 AY 2015

Percent of primary faculty 75% 82% 70.5% 66.7% involved in service outside of SPH1 Number of students who take 15 16 13 6 service learning course in UG (Spring term) Number of SPH students >100 43 66 ~752 active in ISCOPES Inclusion of service as part of 100% PHSA PHSA PHSA all student organizations3 MHA MHA MHA BPHSN BPHSN BPHSN GHN GHN GHN HPSA

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 205 1 Percentage generated by searching faculty service from annual faculty report in Lyterati and dividing by number of primary faculty. 2 This number is still in flux as it is the beginning of the academic year. 3 This past year, the Public Health Student Association became the umbrella organization for all SPH student groups, enabling better tracking of student organization events, as well as being able to provide funding for activities. The current groups under the umbrella include: Health Policy Student Association (HPSA), Black Public Health Student Network (BPHSN), Global Health Network (GHN) and Masters of Health Administration (MHA).

3.2.e. Description of student involvement in service, outside of those activities associated with the required practice experience and previously described in Criterion 2.4.

GW has a long and proud tradition of engaging students in service. The Honey W. Nashman Center for Civic Engagement and Public Service provides (primarily undergraduate) students with a central place to become involved in community service, find resources for funding their projects and become a life-long volunteer. The center provides service opportunities for students such as getting involved in D.C. schools, Alternative Breaks to volunteer abroad, etc. See more at: https://serve.gwu.edu/.

Annual volunteering events include:

• Freshman Day of Service • Hunger & Homelessness Awareness Week • Adopt-A-Family • Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service • Earth Day • Celebration of Service

GW students are some of the most engaged in career service as well. Since 2008, the university has ranked first among medium-sized universities graduating Peace Corps Volunteers.

The School encourages all students to engage in community service through course work and extra- curricular activities, student organizations, and the school-sponsored service learning initiative, ISCOPES. More details on these follow.

1. Coursework and extra-curricular activities

Undergraduate: BS-PH: An elective course with a service learning component is offered, but not required.

BS-EXSC: All students are encouraged to complete 10 hours of community/volunteer work in EXNS 1103. The site must be approved in advance by the instructor. Students must have documentation that service

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 206 hours have been completed to get full credit. The documentation must be signed by a supervising member of the organization (sorority sisters or fraternity brothers cannot sign).

Masters: There are no formal course requirements for service; however many students do volunteer work. Students engage in short-term projects such as the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service in addition to long term volunteer positions during the academic year. In addition to their practical experience, many students volunteer at the following organizations:

• RAINN (www.rainn.org) • DC Rape Crisis (http://dcrapecrisiscenter.org/) • Mary’s Center (http://www.maryscenter.org/) • Sasha Bruce Youthwork (http://sashabruce.org/) • Whitman Walker (http://www.whitman-walker.org/) • Metro Teen AIDS (http://metroteenaids.org/site/) • Futures without Violence (http://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/) • Planned parenthood (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/) • National Park service • Metropolitan Washington Public Health Association ( http://mwpha.org/) • ISCOPES (http://www.iscopes.gwu.edu)

It is not uncommon for our students to engage in new initiatives as well. Some examples include:

• Students launch test recycling project at Taste of DC: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/students-launch-test-recycling-project-taste-dc • Avance Center: George Washington University students participate in research and academic activities within the Avance Center, located at the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University. Students receive mentoring from public health faculty and senior level staff while working on current Center projects. http://avancegw.org/aboutus/students/ • SPH students commit to tackling global health challenges: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/gw-students-commit-tackling-global-health- challenges • GW students and faculty raise awareness about eating disorders: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/gw-raises-awareness-eating-disorders-full- week-events

2. Student organizations: The School supports several student organizations (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/services/students/student-organizations), most of which include service as a priority. Examples of student organization engagement in service:

The Public Health Student Association (PHSA): • Regular volunteer days at Bread for the City. • Volunteered at the Heart Walk at Nationals Park in early September.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 207 • Organize events for National Public Health Week (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/recap- national-public-health-week-gw).

Health Services Management and Leadership Student Association: • “Last Saturday”: Students volunteer the last Saturday of every month by helping assemble donated groceries into bags, then transferring bags to disabled residents in subsidized housing. Student volunteers = 15. • Walk to End Breast Cancer: Annually, MHA students come together to raise money and participate in the walk to increase breast cancer awareness. Student volunteers = 25. • NCHE C-Suite Event: MHA students help host this event. Number of student volunteers = 12

The Black Public Health Student Network (BPHSN): • Members participate in Whitman Walker AIDS Walk (annually). • Annual Minority Health Conference open to the community. • Poetry slam nights with community organizations. • HIV Prevention and Health Information Tables for the public. • Presentations from community based organizations, such as Men Can Stop Rape. • Canned goods and book collections to benefit community organizations such as DC Kitchen and Miriam’s Kitchen.

Health Policy Student Association (HPSA): Service has not been a focus in the past; however, going forward, the group plans to add community service initiatives as a priority goal. For next year, they plan to volunteer with DC Health Link during open enrollment to help DC residents sign up for insurance through the DC exchange.

Delta Omega: • Host alumni lecture events for current students. • Provide judges for Annual Research Day. • Co-host the Practicum Connect Event. • Host career development events.

3. ISCOPES: Interdisciplinary Student Community-Oriented Prevention Enhancement Service (http://www.iscopes.gwu.edu)

ISCOPES, which is housed in the School of Public Health, is a 20-year-old evolving health-focused service learning and workforce development initiative that places GW students and GW employees from various fields of study as well as community practitioners and neighbors from around the DC Metro Area in inter-professional learning communities to address bigger picture health issues through results-oriented service. Students from the schools of public health, medicine, nursing, and education collaborate in a

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 208 year-long, innovative, inter-professional service-learning program. The ISCOPES curriculum and its longitudinal service projects continuously evolve to reflect the changing conditions of our healthcare and public health-related systems as well as the latest best practices. Moreover, ISCOPES continuously adapts to address the needs of our community partners, students, departmental partners as well as our coaches and advisors. This past year (AY14/15) we had 66 students from across the School of Public Health as well as 10 students from three other schools at GW working together on organizational development and health education programming. In AY15/16 we aspire to have 100 SPH students participate in ISCOPES. Students from the SPH are very active in ISCOPES, as shown below:

a. Participation*: o 2012-2013: 45/64 (70%) accepted students were affiliated with SPH o 2013-2014: 43/73 (59%) accepted students were affiliated with SPH o 2014-2015: 66/76 (87%) accepted students were affiliated with SPH

*Students must apply to ISCOPES each academic year. Acceptance rates vary based on project needs, student skill sets, and student availability.

b. Types of activities: o SPH students were involved in all five inter-professional Learning Communities, our regional case competition team, and our local Alternate Spring Break team. o They have worked on improving knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to numerous health issues (including, but not limited to accessing, preparing, eating nutritious food; engaging in daily physical activity; stress management; healthy relationships; HIV/STI prevention; chronic disease self-management; health careers; computer health literacy; ER/medical home health literacy; pharmaceutical literacy; mental health; falls prevention; dexterity; and isolation prevention) among thousands of diverse people (across lifespan, singles/couples/families, foster youth, unhoused/housed folks, variety of mental and physical abilities, mostly extremely low-moderately low SES, immigrants/non-immigrants, numerous races/genders/sexual orientations/religious backgrounds, high school dropouts-college graduates, etc.) in all eight wards of the District of Columbia. o Number of hours: Minimum student commitment is 80 hours/year (over the course of the academic year); 80x154 SPH affiliated students = at least 12,320 hours of service in three years (among SPH students).

3.2.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met, with commentary.

Strengths: • The School and University have a deep and long standing commitment to service. • Service is a key element in promotion and tenure decisions. • Our faculty and students provide many hours of service to the university, professional organizations and communities.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 209 • Growing portfolio of funding in partnership with DC government. • ISCOPES Advisory Board includes stakeholders.

Challenges: • We do not have robust systems in place to track service for students. • Faculty often under-report their service activities. • ISCOPES is an intensive program, so it currently can only facilitate activities for a relative small number of our students.

Future Goals: • Work with student organizations to maintain/increase commitment to service. • Reinforce service expectations during annual faculty reviews. • Increase scope and range of ISCOPES.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 210 3.3. WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT. THE SCHOOL SHALL ENGAGE IN ACTIVITIES OTHER THAN ITS OFFERING OF DEGREE PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORT THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH WORKFORCE.

3.3.a. Description of the ways in which the school periodically assesses the continuing education needs of the community or communities it intends to serve. The assessment may include primary or secondary data collection or data sources.

The School assesses continuing professional education needs through a variety of formats and on an almost continual basis. Some ways in which we achieve this are:

1. Survey of employers that hire graduates of our programs. Since the summer of 2014, we have conducted annual surveys through our career counselor to ascertain the strengths and areas for improvement of our students in the workforce. We then present the collected data to the school- wide curriculum committee. 2. Several funded projects and centers actively engage community participation through community advisory boards. For example, under the CMS grant, Dr. Spielberg meets monthly with representatives from 8 community organizations. 3. Survey community members on public health priorities through regular events such as our community health innovation seminar and through the Rodham Institute Community Forums. 4. Faculty participation on community organizations’ advisory boards (see ERF 3.2.c: Service Activities). 5. Periodic surveys of our practicum preceptors. (See Criterion 2.4) 6. The academic program reviews require a site visit by an external site visit team. (See Criterion 1.2.b) 7. Many of our organized research units have advisory boards. For examples, within the Avance Center, there are two community advisory boards, one for the Adelante project and one for the CDC REACH project. 8. Use existing alliances and networks for input. For example, our MeTRIC consortium includes the Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies at Legacy. 9. Host events to solicit input and encourage discussion around topics. For example, On February 24-25, 2015 the Redstone Center hosted a meeting of 30 foundations and funders invested in efforts to prevent childhood obesity.

The information and input gathered through these various means is considered both at the department and school level. Response to the input could include addition of new certificate programs. An example of a professional enhancement certificate is the Graduate Certificate in Healthcare Corporate Compliance (http://cps.gwu.edu/healthcare-compliance), which is offered in collaboration with the College of Professional Studies and a local law firm. The certificate in Long Term Care (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/long-term-care-certificate) was launched in response to an increasing number of states licensing long-term care facility managers.

The input received can also influence our curriculum.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 211 The Department of Health Policy and Management responded to input from practice-based faculty with several curricular changes due to changing needs in the field. In 2013 the MPH in Health Policy curriculum was revised to add a course titled “Statistical Analysis in Health Policy” in response to practice recommendations that graduates know the bio-statistical software application STATA. In addition, because the field of health policy has numerous sub-dimensions, the Culminating Experience in Health Policy course was revised in 2014 to provide a “menu” of final project options for the students with real-world clients to better mirror the types of work the students will face in employment after graduation.

The Department of Environmental and Occupational Health changed the format of the culminating experience (CE) for both the Global Environmental Health and the Environmental Health Science and Policy MPH degrees to a course based system, with a one-credit class in both the fall and spring semesters, focused on conducting and communicating a systematic review of the scientific knowledge in a specific area of environmental and occupational health. The new course provides students with skills in demand in the EOH workplace and provides greater structure for timely completion of the CE.

Finally, the School offers numerous open seminars and conferences to address pressing public health issues. Since moving into our new building, we have offered over 175 open access events.

3.3.b. A list of the continuing education programs, other than certificate programs, offered by the school, including number of participants served, for each of the last three years. Those programs offered in a distance-learning format should be identified. Funded training/continuing education activities may be reported in a separate table. See CEPH Template 3.3.1 (Optional template for funded workforce development activities). Only funded training/continuing education should be reported in Template 3.3.1. Extramural funding for research or service education grants should be reported in Templates 3.1.1 (research) or 3.2.2. (funded service), respectively.

The SPH offers myriad opportunities for workforce development, which was helped tremendously by the opening of the new SPH building. Workforce development programs, offered by individual departments as well as the School, are presented in ERF 3.3.b.: Workforce Development Report. SPH faculty have also been involved in workforce development activities nationally and internationally. In addition to the open forums and panel discussions mentioned earlier, we offer numerous workforce development activities. Some, such as the Public Health Risk Science and Management training program are held annually, while other events are one-time offerings. Funded projects, such as DC-CFAR, support regular and open workforce development seminars. Activities range from hour-long presentations to weeks long training, such as the GW-APHL International Institute for Public Health. Training workshops have been held both locally and globally (e.g. Kenya, Zimbabwe). Target audiences have ranged from city planners and architects to athletes and parents, statisticians, laboratory managers, ministers of health, WHO leadership and, of course, both government and NGO employees. Presentation modalities have included in-person and virtual and participant numbers have ranged from a small handful to thousands.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 212 3.3.c. Description of certificate programs or other non-degree offerings of the school, including enrollment data for each of the last three years.

In 2013, the SPH evaluated its certificate offerings and enrollment numbers and decided to narrow down the real workforce needs to four certificate programs. The other certificate programs are being phased out and are no longer accepting new students. Current students previously matriculated into any of the discontinued programs, have been permitted to complete the certificate requirements. Deactivated certificates will be discontinued after summer session 2016 when all students have been given ample opportunity to complete the certificate requirements.

The four active certificate programs offered by the SPH are:

• Health Administration Generalist (18 credits) • Health Policy (18 credits) • Long Term Care (18 credits) • Public Health (15 credits)

Our certificate programs attract three types of students:

• Students matriculated in other MPH degrees who want additional, concentrated knowledge in additional areas. • Students from other GW programs. • Professionals in the public health workforce who do not have formal public health education.

For additional program information, the website link is: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics/graduate/certificates

Table 3.3.c. Certificate Enrollment Certificate Program AY 2013-2014 AY 2014-2015 AY 2015-2016 Health Administration Generalist 3 0 1 Health Policy 3 1 3 Long Term Care 1 0 0 Public Health 0 0 11 Other Certificate Programs2 18 12 11 Data for this report obtained from fall census each Academic Year. 1 The certificate in public health was just re-launched at the end of last spring. As such, we anticipate notable growth in enrollment.

2 Students in ‘Other Certificate Programs’ combines students in deactivated certificate programs who matriculated before the program was deactivated. Students are completing these programs. No applicants are being accepted into these deactivated certificate programs.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 213 Other examples • From fall of 2010 through the summer of 2013, the Department of Health Services Management and Leadership (now part of HPM) offered a graduate certificate program in Health Information Technology (HIT), funded by American Recovery and Investment Act (ARRA) monies. This program was coordinated in collaboration with faculty and leaders from different GW schools and organizations, including the School of Business, the School of Engineering and Applied Science, the School of Medicine and Health Services, and GW’s Medical Faculty Associates. The 18-credit program curriculum was developed to target four roles defined by the Health and Human Services Office of the National Coordinator (ONC): Clinician and Public Health Leaders; Information Management and Exchange Specialists; Privacy and Security Specialists; and Programmers and Software Engineers. GW’s HIT program targeted candidates with either IT experience or healthcare experience. As a stipulation from the grant, all students had to finish the HIT graduate certificate within one calendar year. During the funding period, 250 students successfully completed the HIT graduate certificate program.

• In addition to the certificate programs offered by the School of Public Health, we also collaborate with the College of Professional Studies on a Healthcare Corporate Compliance certificate program (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/programs/joint-healthcare-corporate- compliance-certificate-and-masters-programs). This comprehensive, 12-credit certificate offers education in healthcare laws and regulations as well as tools and strategies for creating effective corporate compliance programs. Approximately 30 students are enrolled in this certificate each year.

3.3.d. Description of the school’s practices, policies, procedures and evaluation that support continuing education and workforce development strategies.

1. Certificate programs. As mentioned above, the School performs periodic reviews of enrollment numbers in certificate programs. New certificate programs are proposed based on a changing workforce environment or because of an identified need. For example, when the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and the federal Anti-Kickback and Stark Laws were adopted, we saw a need to educate corporate compliance officers. The Health Information Technology certificate was created in response to a call for proposals from the U.S Department of Veterans Affairs.

2. Collaborative agreements. Many of our ongoing workforce activities are in collaboration with external organizations such as the American Public Health Laboratories; USAID; the Lewin Group; and The National Press Club. Through such partnerships we commit to long-term involvement in work force development that is relevant to our partner organizations.

3. ASPPH recommendations and reports. The Milken Institute School of Public Health is an active member in ASPPH. As such, we review and incorporate recommendations from the Association.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 214 3.3.e. A list of other educational institutions or public health practice organizations, if any, with which the school collaborates to offer continuing education.

In addition to those organizations listed in the ERF 3.3.b: Workforce Development Report, we have offered many open continuing education events. Over the last three years, SPH has coordinated over 50 events involving faculty, students, and staff of GW as well as the larger public health community. Attendees had the opportunity to participate in discussions at these events, and students also had the opportunity to volunteer for a number of events. Many of these events involved partnering with public health groups, organizations and experts. A selection of highlighted events held since 2013 are described below.

• During Cancer Prevention Month in 2013, the SPH partnered with the Breast Cancer Fund and the H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment to host an event focused on breast cancer prevention. The event highlighted the results of a groundbreaking report by the Interagency Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Coordinating Committee released earlier that year. Participants included representatives from the partner organizations as well as the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. http://gwtoday.gwu.edu/breast-cancer-experts-emphasize-importance-environment- prevention.

• An event in March 2013 with featured guest Ashley Judd, actress, humanitarian and public health advocate, that focused on women’s rights and reproductive health. http://gwtoday.gwu.edu/ashley-judd-talks-women’s-health-gw.

• In May 2013, GW hosted the Global Engagement in Care conference, which was co-hosted by the DC Developmental Center for AIDS Research (DC-DCFAR). DC-DCFAR is housed within Milken Institute School of Public Health. The event featured then Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of the US Global AIDS Coordinator also assisted in the planning. Representatives from the CDC, the White House and OGAC were present. http://Utoday.gwu.edu/kathleen-sebelius-discusses- global-engagement-hivaids.

• In April 2013, SPH partnered with TEDMED to host TEDMED Great Challenges Day, which was made possible by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Over 40 SPH students volunteered at the event, and two SPH faculty members led breakout sessions. View the media advisory about the event here: http://www.newswise.com/articles/gw-hosts-tedmed-s-great-challenges-day- to-collaborate-on-complex-problems-in-healthcare.

• The SPH worked with student leaders, faculty and staff at the school to host a forum focused on gun violence and mental health in April 2013. Students from the Public Health Student Association, the Black Public Health Student Association, Health Policy Student Association and the Department of Professional Psychology developed and shaped the content, themes and

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 215 agenda. Panelists included Georges Benjamin of the American Public Health Association; Daniel Webster of the Center for Gun Policy and Research at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Paramjit Joshi of Children’s National Medical Center; Richard Cooter and Olga Acosta Price from GW. http://gwtoday.gwu.edu/forum-examines-gun-regulations-and-public- health-policy.

• During National Public Health Week 2013, SPH partnered with the American Public Health Association to host a screening of the film Escape Fire: The Fight to Rescue American Healthcare. The screening was followed by a panel discussion that included a physician who appeared in the film, a SPH faculty member, and the president and CEO of Core Health. The following story compiles the week’s activities as experienced on social media: https://storify.com/GWPublicHealth/national-public-health-week-at-sphhs-2013.

• In December 2013, SPH hosted a discussion focused on the future of public health education. The collaborative program included guest speakers Donna Petersen, Dean of the University of South Florida’s College of Public Health; Jon Andrus, Pan American Health Organization Deputy Director; Howard Koh, U.S. Assistant Secretary for Health; and Rajiv Rimal, Professor and Chair of the Department of Prevention and Community Health at SPH. View a story about both the mHealth event and the future of public health education event in GW Today here: http://gwtoday.gwu.edu/re-visioning-public-health-and-medicine-21st-century.

• In February 2014, SPH hosted a week-long series of events to raise awareness for eating disorders, especially on college campuses. The week’s main event featured guest Mika Brzezinski, co-host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” View the week’s agenda here: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/sphhs-raises-awareness-eating-disorders-full-week- events.

• The SPH has hosted multiple events on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, including one in which SPH partnered with the Vitality Institute in February 2014. The Vitality Institute is an action-oriented global research organization. The panel discussion included the Acting Surgeon General of the U.S., the Chief Medical Officer from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and health policy experts from the private sector and academia, including SPH.

• For 14 years, GW has been involved in the Global Health Mini-University, a day-long conference sponsored by SPH, USAID and the Global Health Professional and Organizational Development. Students, faculty, staff throughout GW and members of the public health community have the opportunity to attend sessions, lead sessions, and present their research. View Global Health Mini-University Conference Highlights from 2015: http://www.mini- university.org/content/2015-highlights.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 216 • In the fall of 2014, SPH hosted two major events surrounding the Ebola virus outbreak crisis. The first event, held in September, focused on the Global Health Security Agenda and was held in collaboration with the White House. SPH faculty members spoke at the event and were involved in the development of the Global Health Security Agenda. The second event, held in October, convened a panel of SPH faculty experts to discuss current challenges and how to move forward. Read the press release about the October event here: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/ebola-panel.

• In December 2014, the SPH worked with WETA, the DC-area’s public broadcasting station, to film a segment for its documentary series, “Cancer: The Emperor of All Maladies,” in the SPH auditorium. The documentary was based off the book by Pulitzer-Prize-winning author Siddhartha Mukherjee. The segment filmed at SPH featured host Katie Couric, global news anchor, Yahoo! News and co-founder, Stand Up To Cancer (SU2C); with Ken Burns, executive producer and series creative consultant; Siddhartha Mukherjee, author, “The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer”; and Sharon Percy Rockefeller, president & CEO, WETA.

• In June 2015, The George Washington University mHealth Collaborative and ICF International hosted a 1-day symposium on the challenges and opportunities around the integration of mHealth into health systems for disease prevention and management. Topics covered included mHealth and health behavior change, the use of Apple's ResearchKit, text messaging in health systems for patient care and engagement, cyber security and privacy, and global mHealth. The symposium featured speakers from the George Washington University, the National Institutes of Health, the Veteran’s Affairs Office of Connected Health, the Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Johns Hopkins University and ICF International. See more at: https://smhs.gwu.edu/mhealth/events/symposium-mhealth-health-systems-era-healthcare- transformation

3.3.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • The new building supports greater flexibility in offering continuing education opportunities. • SPH has established many long-term collaborations for workforce training. • SPH works collaboratively with other GW units to offer continuing education.

Challenges: • No centralized office to coordinate all workforce activities. • Funding for important workforce development is limited. • We do not currently track workforce funding specifically.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 217 Future Plans: • Leverage the curriculum created for our two online programs to develop and launch at least one MOOC related to health impacts of climate change. • Pursue high-quality partners to expand our workforce development offerings. • We have not historically tracked specific affiliations of those attending many of our sponsored events. Going forward, we will add an affiliation line on any event sign in sheets.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 218 CRITERIA 4: FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS

4.1 FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS. THE SCHOOL SHALL HAVE A CLEARLY DEFINED FACULTY WHICH, BY VIRTUE OF ITS DISTRIBUTION, MULTIDISCIPLINARY NATURE, EDUCATIONAL PREPARATION, PRACTICE EXPERIENCE AND RESEARCH AND INSTRUCTIONAL COMPETENCE, IS ABLE TO FULLY SUPPORT THE SCHOOL’S MISSION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

4.1.a. A table showing primary faculty who support the degree programs offered by the school. It should present data effective at the beginning of the academic year in which the self-study is submitted to CEPH and should be updated at the beginning of the site visit. This information must be presented in table format, organized by department, specialty area or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school and must include at least the following: a) name, b) title/academic rank, c) FTE or % time, d) tenure status or classification*, g) graduate degrees earned, h) discipline in which degrees were earned, i) institutions from which degrees were earned, j) current instructional areas and k) current research interests. See CEPH Data Template 4.1.1

Over the past few years, the SPH has witnessed significant growth in the number of full and part-time faculty, commensurate with the growth in research and educational offerings. The number of tenured faculty has also grown 58% since 2013. As of fall 2015, the number of primary faculty at the SPH is 135; the total faculty headcount rose to 298, an increase of 27%. The Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Epi/Bio) and Prevention and Community Health (PCH) saw strong growth; while the Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences (EXNS) remained fairly constant. Merging the Departments of Health Services Management and Leadership (HSML) and Health Policy (HP) to the new Department of Health Policy & Management (HPM) consolidated resources, allowing for a slight decrease in primary faculty. However, with the growth of both online programs, the part-time faculty has increased significantly in the HPM department. The Department of Global Health (GH) has strategically maintained its primary faculty headcount, but has been able to make strides in filling open faculty positions with tenure track faculty. Curricula vitae for all faculty members are included in the electronic resource file.

CEPH Data Template 4.1.1 presents details of the primary faculty of the SPH including information related to graduate degrees attained, institutions where the degrees were earned, courses taught and subject expertise. All of our full-time faculty members have earned a doctoral degree (PhD, MD, JD, ScD), with one exception, a long-term faculty member in the Department of Prevention and Community Health, who holds a PA-C and a MPH. The areas of expertise are in alignment with the educational programs that we offer.

Find CEPH Data Template 4.1.1- Primary Faculty below for each department. This template is available as well in ERF 4.1.a.: CEPH Data Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty. Curriculum Vitae for each of our primary faculty can also be found in ERF 4.1.a.: Primary Faculty Curriculum Vitae.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 219 TABLE 4.1.1 PRIMARY FACULTY

Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Environmental and Occupational Health 2015-16

Title/ Academic Tenure All Graduate Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Name FTE Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Degrees Earned Conferred Degree(s) Area(s) (Course Names)

Environmental and occupational ScD Harvard University Epidemiology & Applied Data Analysis in K. Applebaum Assistant Professor TR 1.0 exposures and biological pathways to MS Emory University Environmental Health EOH chronic diseases and cancer

Medicine Children's Environmental Health; MD Univ of CA, San Fran Health & Medical Environmental Health; Environmental L. Goldman Professor T 1.0 MS Univ of CA, Berkeley N/A Sciences Health Policy; Public Health MPH Johns Hopkins Univ Epidemiology Preparedness and Emergency Response

Global Environmental Environmental Health and Occupational PhD Johns Hopkins Univ Zoonotic Infectious Diseases; Engineering Health; Water, J. Graham Assistant Professor TR 1.0 MPH Univ of Texas Antimicrobial Resistance; Water, Environmental Health Sanitation and Hygiene MBA Univ of Texas Sanitation, and Hygiene Business Administration for Health and Development

Toxicology; Env/Occ Health in Sustainable World; Principles of PhD Environmental Health Risk characterization, risk G. Gray Professor N 1.0 Univ of Rochester Toxicology MS Risk Science; communication, risk policy Environmental and Occupational Health Research and Practice Environmental Engineering and Env/Occ Health in PhD Univ of Florida Sciences Sustainable World; Sustainable energy strategies; Life cycle P. LaPuma Associate Professor N 1.0 MS Air Force Engineering and Sustainable Energy and analysis MBA Wright State Environmental the Environment Management Business Administration

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 220 Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Environmental and Occupational Health 2015-16 (continued)

All Specific Discipline of Title/ Academic Tenure Graduate Institution Degree Current GW Teaching Name FTE Degree(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Degrees Conferred Area(s) (Course Names) Earned Social Factors Shaping Adoption of

Renewable Technologies; Reducing Social

PhD Social Dimensions of Disparities of Heat Waves in a Changing S. McCormick Associate Professor TR 1.0 Brown University Sociology MA Climate Change and Health Climate; Communicating Climate Change;

Climate Change and Health; Citizen Science in the Deepwater Horizon Spill

on PhD Sociomedical Sciences Occupational Safety and Health; D. Michaels Professor T Columbia Univ N/A leave MPH Epidemiology Regulations and Regulatory Effectiveness

Germs: Intro to Rat gut microbiomes; Nanoparticle use as R. Mitchell Visiting Professor N 0.12 PhD Cornell Univ Evolutionary Biology Environmental Health disinfectant; Climate change and Microbiology biodeterioriation Air pollution, including studying pollutant Drexel University Environmental composition, exposure monitoring, PhD Assessment & Control of A. Northcross Assistant Professor TR 1.0 Univ of North Engineering exposure assessment, and identifying MS Environmental Hazards Carolina Environmental Science interventions that can reduce pollution & Engineering and improve human health

Environmental and G. Paulson Professor N 1.0 PhD Rockefeller Univ Environmental Science Environmental policy and regulations Occupational Health

Psychiatric Environmental & Health effects of pesticides; Agricultural ScD Johns Hopkins M. Perry Professor T 1.0 Epidemiology Occupational; injuries and exposures; Preventive MHS Univ Public Health Epidemiology interventions in workplaces

Northern Arizona Biological Concepts for Livestock-associated MRSA, foodborne Biology MS Univ Public Health; Public Health urinary tract infections, and the role of L. Price Professor T 1.0 Environmental Health PhD Johns Hopkins Genomics; Communicating the human microbiome in health and Sciences Univ Science for Public Health disease The interplay between environmental Environmental & chemicals exposures and psychosocial ScD A. Zota Assistant Professor TR 1.0 Harvard Univ Environmental Health Occupational; stressors on maternal and child health MS Epidemiology with an emphasis on overlapping biological pathways ● Included here are all Primary faculty to include regular full-time, regular part-time, Research and Visiting faculty appointments. Some of these faculty have no teaching/administrative salary support; however, they support educational activities by guest lecturing, mentoring student research, etc.. ● T= Tenure; TR= Tenure Track; N= Non Tenure

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 221 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics 2015-16 All Title/ Academic Tenure Graduate Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Name FTE Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Degrees Conferred Degree(s) Area(s) (Course Names) Earned Univ of Maryland Assistant Research PhD Survival Analysis; Adaptive Phase I & II I. Bebu N 1.0 University of Statistics Mathematics Cost Effectiveness Analysis Professor MS Clinical Trials; Diabetes Bucharest Univ of Rhode Assistant Research MS Statistics Principles and Practice of B. Braffett N 1.0 Island George Diabetes, Clinical Trials Professor PhD Epidemiology Epidemiology Washington Univ

Infectious diseases, including vaccine- Infectious Disease preventable diseases specifically polio Epidemiology; HIV/AIDS Univ of eradication and meningococcal disease; MD Medicine Surveillance, Issues in HIV A. Castel Associate Professor TR 1.0 Pennsylvania HIV/AIDS surveillance, prevention, care MPH Public Health Care and Treatment, Johns Hopkins Univ and clinical outcomes, perinatal MSPHMEID Final Project infection; International health; Program evaluation

Associate Research PhD George Washington Distribution function of Risk; Smoking C. Christophi N 0.5 Statistics N/A Professor MS Univ and Youth Behaviors of Cyprus

Advanced Epidemiologic Psychiatric Latino Health; Community Based PhD Columbia Univ Methods; Measurement in S. Cleary Associate Professor T 1.0 Epidemiology Participatory Research; Health MPH Tulane Univ Public Health & Health Epidemiology Disparities; Mental Health Services Research

Design, management and analysis of George Washington randomized clinical trials and Associate Research PhD Univ Epidemiology R. Clifton N 1.0 N/A observational cohort studies in maternal Professor MS George Washington Statistics fetal medicine and prenatal Univ screening/diagnosis

Texas Tech Univ Associate Research PhD K. Drews N 1.0 Univ of So Mathematics N/A Diabetes, Obesity, Multi-site Trials Professor MS Mississippi Biostatistical Methods; Quantitative Methods; Statistical Packages for Longitudinal Data Analysis, Mixed Effects PhD Univ of Data Management and Models, joint modeling of repeated A. Elmi Assistant Professor N 1.0 Biostatistics MS Pennsylvania Data Analysis; Advanced measurement and event/dropout-time Data Analysis; Biostatistical data, curve registration. Applications for Public Health Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 222 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics 2015-16 (continued)

All Title/ Tenure Graduate Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Name Academic FTE Research Interest (If applicable) Status Degrees Conferred Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Earned

Innovative clinical trial design, safety and M. Research PhD Univ of North Carolina Biostatistics and efficacy assessment, analyzing longitudinal data, N 1.0 N/A Foulkes Professor MPH Univ of Michigan Epidemiology interim analyses and data monitoring committees

Infectious Diseases & Assistant PhD Univ of Pittsburgh Microbiology; Public Health Virology and Sexual transmission of HIV in women; M. Ghosh TR 1.0 Professor MS Salem-Teikyo Univ Molecular Infection and Immunity Reproductive health Biology/Biotechnology

George Washington Medicine A. MD Epidemiology & prevention of HIV/AIDS in the Professor T 1.0 Univ Health Policy and HIV Epidemiology & Prevention Greenberg MPH U.S. Harvard Univ Management Implementation research on HIV in women and Research George Washington L. Guay N 1.0 MD Medicine Pediatric HIV/AIDS children in Africa, prevention of Mother-to-Child Professor Univ HIV transmission Research MS Univ of Minnesota Biostatistics K. Hirst N 1.0 N/A Youth onset Type 2 Diabetes; Obesity in youth Professor PhD Univ of Colorado Biostatistics

Data management and analysis using SAS; Introduction to Maximum likelihood estimates for left-censored H. Associate Virginia N 1.0 PhD Biostatistics Biostatistics; Survival Analysis; and missing values; Development of bivariate Hoffman Professor Commonwealth Univ Advanced SAS; Advanced Data MLE tool; HIV and breast cancer Analysis

Biological impacts of the Environment Associate PhD Univ of Tennessee Physical Anthropology K. specializing in genetics, focusing on preterm Research N 1.0 MS George Mason Univ Staistics N/A Jablonski birth and child development, type 2 diabetes, Professor MA Univ of Tennessee Physical Anthropology and the role of the microbiome Molecular Virology Molecular Infectious Disease Diagnostics for J. Jordan Professor T 1.0 PhD Univ of Pittsburgh and Clinical Public Health Lab; Microbiology sepsis, HPV and HIV as well as NGS technology Microbiology Epidemiology of HIV and viral hepatitis in high- risk populations; criminal justice populations, Associate Infectious Disease PhD linkage to HIV care; uptake of pre-exposure I. Kuo Research N 1.0 Johns Hopkins Univ Epidemiology; Design of Health Studies MPH prophylaxis; racial disparities; access to drug Professor Epidemiology treatment, drug use remission & natural history of drug use disorders

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 223 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics 2015-16 (continued) All Title/ Tenure Graduate Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Name Academic FTE Research Interest (If applicable) Status Degrees Conferred Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Earned Intent-to-treat principle in clinical trials; Sample Research Biostatistical methods; Data size evaluation; Group sequential methods; J. Lachin N 1.0 ScD Univ of Pittsburgh Biostatistics Professor analysis; Survival analysis Analysis of repeated measures; Survival analysis; Diabetes PhD Associate Biostatistical Applications in Biostatistics; Missing Data; Health Disparities; Y. Ma TR 1.0 MA Univ of Rochester Biostatistics Professor Public Health; Meta Analysis Health Services Research MS Advanced Epidemiology; HIV/AIDS prevention among at risk and hard to M. Associate PhD Tulane Univ Epidemiology Epidemiology of HIV/AIDS; reach populations; use of novel health T 1.0 Magnus Professor MPH Epidemiology Principles and Practice of information technology in the prevention and Epidemiology treatment of HIV/AIDS. Assistant Social J. Ed.D Morgan State Univ Ethnographic Methods Applied HIV/AIDS, Substance Abuse, Criminal Justice Re- Research N 1.0 Policy/Ethnography Peterson MHS Lincoln Univ in Public Health entry, Ethnographic Methods Professor Human Services Assistant Epidemiology and M. Power TR 1.0 ScD Harvard University N/A Aging, Cognitive Impairment, and Dementia Professor Environmental Health Associate Univ of Washington Epidemiology PhD M. Rice Research N 1.0 Univ of California Los Kinesiology/Exercise N/A Perinatal epidemiology MS Professor Angeles Physiology

Epidemiology; Clinical MD Univ of Wisconsin Educational techniques in epidemiology & PH; R. Epidemiology Epidemiology & Decision Professor T 1.0 PhD Johns Hopkins Univ Evidence-based preventive medicine; Riegelman Epidemiology Analysis; Undergraduate MPH Johns Hopkins Univ Integrating PH & medicine Epidemiology Public Health

Community & Biostatistics in collaborative biomedical & PH S. Research PhD New York Univ N 1.0 Quantitative Biostatistical consulting research; Sample size requirements for pilot Simmens Professor MA Psychology studies; Structural equation modeling Assistant Visual Display of Public Health E. George Washington Research N 1.0 PhD Biostatistics Data, Biostatistical Applications Diabetes, Clinical Trials Temprosa Univ Professor for Public Health

George Washington Mathematical PhD The design of clinical trials and the application of Research Univ Statistics E. Thom N 1.0 MA N/A biostatistics and epidemiology to perinatal Professor Univ of Oxford Mathematics MS medicine and fetal diagnosis and therapy Univ of Reading (UK) Biometry

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 224

Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics 2015-16 (continued) All Title/ Tenure Graduate Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Name Academic FTE Research Interest (If applicable) Status Degrees Conferred Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Earned Visiting Epi Measuring Health & Disease; Methodology for controlling for age and aging, George Washington M. Ulfers Assistant N 1.0 PhD Epidemiology Biostatistics for Application in Disparities in cancer treatment outcomes, Univ Professor Public Health Suicide and end of life issues in the elderly

Biostatistical Applications for Public Health; Statistical Mathematical Packages for Data Management PhD George Washington Biostatistics in collaborative biomedical & PH D. Verme Professor N 1.0 Statistics and Data Analysis; Advanced MS Univ research Applied Statistics Data Analysis; Introduction to GIS; Advanced GIS; Advanced SAS; Time Series

Mathematical Biostatistical Applications for Associate PhD George Washington Biostatistics/Clinical Trials; Design & Analysis of N. Younes TR 1.0 Statistics Public Health; Design of Medical Professor MA Univ Medical Studies Statistics Studies; Introduction to R

Principles and Practice of Epidemiology; Advanced Reproductive cancers, reproductive effects of Associate PhD George Washington Epidemiology H. Young N 1.0 Epidemiology Methods; Cancer pesticide exposures; Environmental and Professor MPH Univ Epidemiology Epidemiology; Reproductive and occupational exposure assessment Perinatal Epidemiology ● Included here are all Primary faculty to include regular full-time, regular part-time, Research and Visiting faculty appointments. Some of these faculty have no teaching/administrative salary support; however, they support educational activities by guest lecturing, mentoring student research, etc.. ● T= Tenure; TR= Tenure Track; N= Non Tenure

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 225 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences 2015-16 Title/ All Graduate Tenure Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Name Academic FTE Degrees Research Interest (If applicable) Status Conferred Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Earned Kinesiology/Human Professional Foundations in Tracking injury rates in youth sports and Growth & Motor Assistant PhD EXSC; Medical Issues in relationship to biological maturation. First aid M. Barron N 1.0 Michigan State Development; Professor MS Athletic Training; Kinesiology; and injury prevention knowledge of youth Kinesiology/Athletic Prevention & Care of Injury coaches. Training

Movement analysis; Cancer treatment PhD Univ of Maryland Kinesiology Anatomy & Physiology I & II; outcomes/ modalities; HIV functional J. Danoff Professor N 1.0 MS Penn State Aerospace Engineering Kinesiology; Biomechanics capabilities in infants, children and adolescents; Stroke and cardiac problems; Acupuncture

Public Health Genomics; Genetics; Ovarian Cancer; Reproductive and J. DeLoia Professor T 1.0 PhD Johns Hopkins Univ Human Genetics Biological Concepts in Public Developmental Biology Health Biostatistics Research & Epidemiology PhD Yale Univ Methods for Exercise Science; Public Health Exercise, weight gain, and metabolic regulation L. DiPietro Professor T 1.0 MPH Yale Univ Epidemiology for Exercise Education in Exercise in aging MS So CT State Science; Biological Basis of Science Disease in Public Health Cardiac Rehabilitation; Clinical Assessments, Exercise Michigan State Cardiac Rehabilitation; Exercise Physiology; PhD Prescription, and ECG L. Hamm Professor N 1.0 Univ Exercise Physiology Alternative Delivery Models for Cardiac MA Fundamentals; Organization Univ of Minnesota Rehabilitation & Management of Clinical Programs in Rotations Visiting Univ of PhD M. Hubal Assistant N 1.0 Massachusetts Exercise Physiology Disease in PH Genetic mapping in sports medicine MS Professor Texas A & M

Impact of exercise training, nutritional interventions, and aging on physiological Exercise, Nutrition & Assistant PhD Baylor Univ Exercise Phys I; Advanced adaptations & biochemical mechanisms G. Hudson N 1.0 Preventive Health; Professor MA Univ of Alabama Exercise Phys II involved in regulation of metabolism, body Exercise Physiology composition, & insulin sensitivity/glucose uptake

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 226 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences 2015-16 (continued)

Title/ All Graduate Tenure Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Name Academic FTE Degrees Research Interest (If applicable) Status Conferred Degree(s) Area(s) (Course Names) Rank Earned Metabolic effect of artificial sweeteners; Taste Nutritional Sciences I & II; preferences and intestinal microbiome Visiting Nutritional & Health Basic Nutrition; Adv A. Meni N 1.0 PhD Emory Univ developments; Psychosocial interventions for Professor Sciences Concepts in Nutritional treating obesity-related conditions for Science children Current Topics in Strength & Physiological adaptation of skeletal muscle in Conditioning; Science & response to exercise and disuse; Physiological Associate Theory of Resistance responses to exercise training in elite athletes; T. Miller N 1.0 PhD Texas A&M Exercise Physiology Professor Training; Advanced Exercise Factors affecting health club usage in Phys I; An/aerobic Exercise American public; Emerging role of interactive Testing & Prescription video gaming on physical activity Public Health Nutrition and Leadership; Food and Water Nutrition in chronic disease prevention; Food Systems in Public Health; US access in underserved communities; Univ of Washington Associate PhD Food Policy and Politics; Environmental nutrition and sustainable food K. Robien T 1.0 Massachusetts Nutritional Sciences Professor MS Systematic Review of systems; Exposure to food-borne chemicals General Hospital Dietetics Literature for Public Health; may contribute to risk of obesity and chronic Chronic Disease diseases Epidemiology Nutrition epidemiology; Nutitional exposures S. Associate PhD Tufts Univ Human Nutrition Nutrition & Chronic Disease; TR 1.0 and health disparities; Dietary determinants in Talegawkar Professor MHSc Univ of Mumbai Food Science & Nutrition Nutrition & Aging elderly. Evidence-based approaches to youth sport Exercise and Sport Sports & Exercise sustainability; Early positive physical activity PhD Psychology; Psychology of Assistant Psychology; movement experiences; Physical literacy A.Visek T 1.0 MS West Virginia Univ Injury & Rehabilitation; Professor Sports Psychology among children; Public health practice of the MA Exercise & Health Counseling fun integration theory in youth sports; Psychology Aggression in sports Prevention and Care of Univ of Virginia Sports Medicine/Athletic Sports Injury; Injury Burnout, stress management & coping B. Associate MeD George Washington Training Assessment; Professional interventions among athletic training N 1.0 Westerman Professor EdD Univ Higher Ed Foundations of Exercise professionals; Value of athletic trainers in Science; Exercise Science ambulatory health care settings. Field Experience ● Included here are all Primary faculty to include regular full-time, regular part-time, Research and Visiting faculty appointments. Some of these faculty have no teaching/administrative salary support; however, they support educational activities by guest lecturing, mentoring student research, etc.. ● T= Tenure; TR= Tenure Track; N= Non Tenure

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 227

Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Global Health 2015-16 All Title/ Institution Tenure Graduate Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Name Academic FTE Degree Research Interest (If applicable) Status Degrees Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Conferred Earned Univ California Global Health Economics and Development Economics, Health Economics, Associate PhD Berkeley Agricultural and S. Baird T 1.0 Finance, Doctoral Research Program Design and Impact Evaluation; Applied Professor MS Univ California resource economics Methods Microeconomics Berkeley

GH Qualitative Methods in GH; Nutrition Policy; Environment and Programs, U. Colon- Assistant ScD Harvard Univ Public Health Nutrition International Food & Nutrition TR 1.0 Cardiovascular Disease, Diet and Health Ramos Professor MPA Cornell Univ Nutritional Sciences Policies & Programs; GH Disparities Nutrition Problems

Women's health and empowerment, violence against women and girls, gender PhD Umea Univ Epidemiology and M. Ellsberg Professor N 1.0 Guest Lecturer equity, research in conflict and humanitarian MA Yale Univ Public Health settings, participatory action research, mixed methods research Global Health Conventions and Agreements; International K. Gamble- Adolescents' Mental Health; Women and Gender Adjunct N 0.5 MA Stanford Comparative literature Health Org; Comparative Payne Equality Regional Determinants of Health Visiting MD Baylor Mass Inst Child & fetal growth and development, child C. Garza N 0.0 Pediatrics and Nutrition None Professor PhD Technology nutrition

Cost-benefit Analysis in Public Health; Global Health Assistant PhD Univ of Penn Demography Demography; public nutrition & poverty; health C. Huang TR 1.0 Economics and Finance; Global Professor MA Bejing Univ Population Economics inequality; environmental health; tobacco control health Quantitative Research Methods

Global Health Program

Development and

Implementation; Global Health E. Adjunct DrPH Tulane Health Systems Mgt & N 0.5 Project Management and Medicaid State Plans; Health Care Regulation Migliaccio Professor MPH Univ of Hawaii International Health; Leadership; Leadership in Health Administration Public Health Practice and & Gerontology Policy

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 228 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Global Health 2015-16 (continued) All Title/ Institution Tenure Graduate Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Name Academic FTE Degree Research Interest (If applicable) Status Degrees Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Conferred Earned Evaluation methods for complex health Program Evaluation, Nutrition Assistant PhD Johns Hopkins Int’l Health & Health interventions; case-based evaluation S. Mookherji TR 1.0 Evaluation, Case Study Professor MHS Economics methodology; health systems performance; Methods for GH Evaluation tuberculosis control, urban health. Health communication and culture; Behavior GH Communication Strategies change communication; Mhealth and Penn State & Skills; GH Data Collection; Assistant PhD Communication communication; Chronic disease prevention; K. Ndiaye TR 1.0 Univ of New GH Communication theories; Professor MA Health Communication Culture and health prevention; Health Mexico GH Essentials for success in communication in Sub-Saharan; NCD Prevention Global Health Communication in Developing countries Emerging Zoonotic Diseases & Global Food Animal Production; Advanced Topics in Health Leadership, Human/animal interface; emerging & zoonotic Assistant PhD Johns Hopkins Int’l Health, Disease, A. Roess TR 1.0 International Settings; diseases ; effects of animal raising practices on Professor MPH Rutgers Prevention & Control/Epi Advanced Topics: Health public health Research in the Global Arena; Global Environmental and Occupational Health

Population and Development, Global Health Quantitative Demography, Population Health, Social Network Univ of Sociology/Population Research Methods, Advanced Associate PhD Methodology, Social Networks and Health, J. Sandberg T 1.0 Michigan Studies Topics in Health and Research Professor MA Maternal and Child Health, Cognitive Sociology in the Global Arena (doctoral Development, Mental Health program) , Doctoral Research Methods

Univ of Mexico C. Santos- MD Medicine Determinants of Health; Non- Professor TR 1.0 Johns Hopkins Air pollution; Health Impact Assessments Burgoa PhD Epidemiology Communicable Diseases Univ

GH Programs & Approaches Research SARS Pandemic; Influenza Genomic Sequencing; L. Simonsen N 0.3 PhD Univ of Mass Population Genetics to Control of Infectious Professor Malaria Interventions Diseases

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 229

Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Global Health 2015-16 (continued) All Title/ Institution Tenure Graduate Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Name Academic FTE Degree Research Interest (If applicable) Status Degrees Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Conferred Earned Johns Hopkins Frameworks in Global Health; Interventions to improve maternal and child PhD Univ Epidemiology Advanced Topics in Health health and survival in low income countries, and J. Tielsch Professor T 1.0 MHSc Johns Hopkins Epidemiology Leadership, International blindness prevention in both the US and the Univ Settings; Global Child Health developing world

Sociomedical Columbia Univ sciences/Medical PhD Harvard Univ GH Study Design; Ethical & Intersection of culture, health, masculinity, male Assistant Anthropology; E. Uretsky TR 1.0 MA George Cultural Issues in GH; sexuality, and governance in China. HIV/AIDS, Professor East Asian MA Washington Qualitative Research Methods chronic disease. Lang/Civilizations; Univ International Relations

Medicine Associate MD Johns Hopkins P. Vigilance N 1.0 Health Policy & PH Leadership Seminar HIV outreach and education Professor MPH Univ Management Univ of Geneva MD Medicine and Public GH & Development; Emergency response policy, child and neonatal R. Waldman Professor N 1.0 Johns Hopkins MPH Health Humanitarian Operations health in emergencies Univ

● Included here are all Primary faculty to include regular full-time, regular part-time, Research and Visiting faculty appointments. Some of these faculty have no teaching/administrative salary support; however, they support educational activities by guest lecturing, mentoring student research, etc.. ● T= Tenure; TR= Tenure Track; N= Non Tenure

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 230 Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Health Policy & Management 2015-16 Name Title/ Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Academic Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Degrees Conferred Earned

D. Anderson Visiting N 1.0 PhD George Mason Public Policy Intro to US health service Accountable Care Org Dev; Physician Group Assistant MHA Univ Health Administration Delivery; Intro to Practice Professor Duke Univ Management & Economics in Health Care

R. Burke Professor N 1.0 PhD Univ of Florida Medical Sociology Managing skilled Nursing Nursing shortages in nursing homes; Statistical MA Boston College Sociology Facility; Aging & disability health care modeling; Health care workforce needs & services; Intro to issues Health Management

T. Burke Associate N 1.0 LLM George Health Law Health Services and the Law; Legal issues related to Patient Protection & Professor JD Washington Univ Law Public Health Law; and Affordable Care Act; Implementation of state- American Univ Management and Policy based health insurance exchanges; Legal Approaches to Public Health barriers associated with creation & use of health information technology; Application of law to health care payment reform & quality improvement

L. Associate N 1.0 JD Georgetown Univ Law Fundamentals for Health Legal barriers to health system reform, Delivery Cartwright- Research MPH George Health Policy Policy; Management and system reform; Use and exchange of health Smith Professor Washington Univ Policy Approaches to Public information Health

A. Dor Professor T 1.0 PhD City Univ of New Economics Adv Health Econ Research; Medical pricing; Cost–sharing in pharmaceutical York Health Economics & Finance insurance & spillover effects; Role of management contracts in locally competitive positions of American hospitals; Health economics

J. Fischer Associate N 1.0 PhD Vanderbilt Univ Microbiology & Public Health Biology; Global PH preparedness & Response; Infectious Research Immunology Health Diplomacy Disease Surveillance; Lab System strengthening; Professor Global Health Security

S. Frehywot Assistant N 1.0 MD Lady Hardinger Health Policy Analysis Comparative Health Systems Health human resources & health systems Research MHSA Medical College Health Policy Analysis &Policy development in developing countries Professor George Washington Univ

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 231 Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Health Policy & Management 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Tenure FTE All Graduate Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Academic Status Degrees Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Earned Conferred Univ of Southern Health Services Marketing California Public Admin and Planning, Human Health care management centers & strategic PhD Univ of Southern Public Admin Resource Management and management; Organizational theory & behavior; L. Friedman Professor T 1.0 MPA California Community Organization Behavior; Decision making in complex & uncertain MPH California State Health Education Management of Acute Care environments Univ Hospital D. Goldberg Assistant N 0.24 PhD Virginia Health Related Sciences Primary Health Care Policy; Teaching Health Center Evaluation; Community Research MHA Commonwealth & Health Qualitative Research Health Policy Professor MBA Univ Administration Methods; Xavier Univ Xavier Univ M. Goldstein Associate N 1.0 JD Yale Univ Law PH & the Law; Law, Medicine, Legal & policy aspects of health information Professor & Ethics; Bioethics; technology, privacy & security Management & Policy Approaches to PH R. Graham Research N 0.51 MD Univ of Kansas Medicine N/A Quality improvement and primary care Professor

L. Helmchen Associate TR 1.0 MA, PhD MA - Humboldt Economics Health Economics & Financing How financial incentives, payment mechanisms Professor Univ, Berlin; PhD and organizational structures affect health care - Univ. of delivery Chicago J. Hidalgo Research N .87 MSW Princeton Univ Social Work Statistics in Health Policy; Organizing and financing HIV care at state and Professor MPH Yale Univ Health Planning and Health Services Research and federal levels; Maryland AIDS care planning SCD Princeton Univ Policy Health Policy Research and Operation Research Health Systems Change; and Health Service Leadership in Public Health Research Practice

K. Horton Research N 1.0 JD College of Law Federal Policy Making & Medicare/Medicaid; Welfare, social security; Professor MPH William & Mary Epidemiology Advocacy Age & disability assistance; Health reform Yale Univ

R. Katz Associate T 1.0 PhD Princeton Univ Public Affairs Homeland Security & PH Implementation of International Health Professor MPH Yale Univ International Health Policy; Advanced Health Regulations; Foodborne illness surveillance & MA Princeton Univ Public Affairs Policy Analysis; UG Senior response; Biosecurity/biosafety Seminar

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 232 Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Health Policy & Management 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Academic Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Degrees Conferred Earned L. Ku Professor T 1.0 PhD Boston Univ Health Policy Advanced Research Methods Health policy & PH focused on health care MPH Univ of Public Health in Public Policy; Research access & insurance coverage for low-income & MS California, Nutritional Sciences Methods in Public Policy; vulnerable populations Berkeley Doctoral Research Methods II: Univ of Statistical Analysis; Capstone California, Class Berkeley J. Levi Professor N 1.0 PHD George Business Introduction to Health Policy Public Health Systems, Health Reform & Public MA Washington Government Analysis Health, Obesity, HIV, Preparedness Univ Cornell Univ S. Li Assistant TR 1.0 PhD Lehigh Economics Health Economics & Financing Performance and structure of provider markets; Professor University Supplier induced demand; Role of quality information about hospitals, physicians, and insurers in quality improvement; Racial/geographic disparities in health care M. Assistant N 1.0 JD George Law P ublic Health & the Law Medicaid, Health Reform, Community Health, Malcarney Research MPH Washington Health Policy & Federal Policymaking & Policy School Health, Asthma, analyzing regulatory and Professor Univ Management Advocacy legal barriers to guidelines-based healthcare; Tufts Univ Financing of new health system delivery models

A. Markus Associate T 1.0 PhD George Public Policy Fundamentals for Health Childhood asthma, Children's Health Insurance Professor MHS Washington Health Policy Policy; Public Health & Health Program (CHIP); Medicaid, health reform, and JD Univ Swiss Law Care; Intro to Maternal & CHIP managed care policies at community Johns Hopkins Child Health Policy Analysis; health centers Univ Adv Maternal & Child Health Univ of Policy; Comparative Health Lausanne Care Systems & Health Policy; Health Systems & Health Policy Research

L. Assistant TR 1.0 PhD Univ of North Health Policy & Quantitative Methods & Globalization of the healthcare workforce; Masselink Professor Carolina Management Epidemiology in Health Health workforce migration; Role of health Services Management; Health workers in organizational change Care Policy Analysis

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 233 Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Health Policy & Management 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Academic Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Rank Degrees Conferred Earned M. Associate T 1.0 ScD Johns Hopkins Health Services Research Statistical Analysis in Health Evaluation of quality of emergency care McCarthy Professor MS Univ Epidemiology Policy; Advanced Health provided in emergency departments; Identifying Univ of Policy Analysis; Theory & patient, provider and system factors that Massachusetts Practice of Research in a influence quality of emergency care provided; Clinical Setting Evaluating quality of care interventions in the ED setting; Evaluating impact that emergency care has on patient-oriented outcomes K. Mead Assistant TR 1.0 PhD George Public Policy Health Policy Research & Health policy & health services research; Racial Professor Washington Design; Qualitative Research & ethnic disparities in access to health care; Univ Methods & Analysis Health care safety net & access to care for underserved populations; Access to reproductive health services; Organization and delivery of cancer survivorship care.

F. Mullan Professor N 1.0 MD Univ of Chicago Medicine Health Workforce Policy; The Medical Education Futures Study, Medical Policy Narrative: Literature & Education Partnership Initiative, Teaching the Making of Health Policy Health Center Evaluation, GME Accountability Studies

J. Phoenix Assistant N 0.88 MD Howard Univ Medicine Management & Policy in Asthma triggers for children; Lead poison Research MPH Johns Hopkins Public Health Public Health; Health Reform; advocacy; Breast cancer and AIDS prevention Professor Univ Environmental and campaigns Occupational Health

P. Pittman Associate T 1.0 PhD Univ of Buenos Medical Anthropology Advanced Health Policy Migration of health workers and health Professor Aires Analysis; Health Workforce workforce reforms in the U.S. Policy W. Psek Assistant TR 1.0 MBChB, Univ of Pretoria Medicine, Health Care Health care systems and Quality of care and strategic approaches to Professor MBA, York Univ Administration quality health delivery transformation PhD Univ North Carolina M. Professor N 1.0 PhD George Public Policy/Health Quality and disparity issues in healthcare; Regenstein MCP Washington City Planning Healthcare safety net Univ Massachusetts Inst Tech S. Professor T 1.0 JD Boston Univ Law Federal Policymaking and US health care system, health care law, Rosenbaum Policy Advocacy, Health Care Medicaid; Health reform law Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 234 Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Health Policy & Management 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Academic Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Degrees Conferred Earned N. Seiler Associate N 1.0 JD Yale Univ Law Federal Policymaking and Implementation of Affordable Care Act with a Research Policy Advocacy, Public focus on the intersection of health reform and Professor Health & Law public health

P. Shin Associate TR 1.0 PhD George Public Policy Welfare & Health Policy; Health care reform; Disparities; Managed care; Professor MPH Washington Epidemiology Research Methods Medically Community health centers; Health care safety Univ Underserved; Management net; Quality improvement; Health economics Approaches to PH and delivery/financing of care in both public and commercial sectors A. Stewart Associate TR 1.0 JD George Law Vaccine Policy; Management Intersection of immunization law & policy; Legal Professor Washington and Policy Approaches to supporting PH goals related to vaccination; ADA Univ Public Health (section leader); Health Law for Managers J. Teitelbaum Associate T 1.0 LLM George Health Law Civil Rights Issues in Health Health care law, health care civil rights; Public Professor; Vice JD Washington Law Care; Health Law health law; Law & medicine/bioethics; Health Chair Academic Univ (undergraduate); Health disparities; Law and social determinants Affairs Marquette Services and Law Univ J. Thorpe Associate N 1.0 JD Vanderbilt Univ Law Introduction to Policy Intersection of health care law & policy in Professor Analysis; Healthcare Quality health care delivery systems & financing with & Health Policy; Intro to focus on Medicare/ Medicaid; HIT & privacy/ Healthcare Corporate security of health information; Medical Compliance; Compliance with innovation; Fraud & abuse & healthcare Specific Laws & Regulations I corporate compliance and II; Case Studies in Health Care Corporate Compliance; Health Law and Policy

J. Volarich Visiting Instructor N 1.0 MHA Univ of Health Services Healthcare Financial Theory; Accuracy, efficiency and internal controls of MBA Pittsburgh Management and Healthcare Finance medical school; Business and strategic plan for Leadership Applications; Adv Healthcare clinical patient care products Finance Finance; Finance

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 235 Template 4.1.1: Primary faculty: Department of Health Policy & Management 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Academic Tenure FTE All Institution Degree Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Graduate Conferred Degree(s) (Course Names) Degrees Earned S. Wilensky Undergraduate N 0.75 JD Univ of Public Policy Service Learning in Public Medically underserved; Medicaid; Health Center Education/Special PhD Pennsylvania Health; Fundamentals of Participation Services Faculty George Health Policy; Health Policy Washington Univ J. Wisdom Professor N 0.0 PhD George Clinical Psychology; N/A Child and adolescent mental health; Mixed MPH Washington Univ Biosatistics; method and qualitative research Oregon Health and Epidemiology Science Univ S. Wood Associate Professor T 1.0 PhD Boston Univ Biology Introduction to Health Policy Women's health and the intersection of research, Analysis data, & policymaking

● Included here are all Primary faculty to include regular full-time, regular part-time, Research and Visiting faculty appointments. Some of these faculty have no teaching/administrative salary support; however, they support educational activities ● T= Tenure; TR= Tenure Track; N= Non Tenure

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 236 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Prevention & Community Health 2015-16 Name Title/ Academic Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Degrees Conferred Earned L. Abroms Associate T 1.0 ScD Harvard Univ Sociology Intro to PH Communication & Application of mobile phones & Professor MA Brown Univ Marketing; Advanced Health communication technologies for smoking Communication; Policy cessation & other health behaviors Approaches to PH

E. Andrade Assistant N 1.0 DrPH George Health Behavior Management Approaches to Health disparities experienced by Latinos, Research MPH Washington Global Health Public Health; Planning & specifically in areas of substance abuse, Professor Univ Administration of Health interpersonal violence & sexual risk Promotion & Disease Prevention Programs

J. Associate T 1.0 PhD Univ of Health Behavior Practical Data Analysis for Quantitative research methods, applied Bingenheimer Professor MPH Michigan Prevention & Community; statistics & causal inference; Social Design & Conduct of epidemiology; Demography; Sociology of Community Health Surveys; the family; Global HIV epidemic; Population Planning & Administration of health in Africa; Adolescent development & Health Promotion Programs health

J. Cawley Professor T 0.8 MPH Johns Hopkins Epidemiology COPC Policy; Physician Physician assistant profession; Primary Univ Assistant/MPH Seminar; COPC care; Health workforce policy Policy; Biologic Concepts of PH; Role of the PA in Health Care

W. Dietz Visiting Professor N 1.0 PhD Mass Institute Medicine N/A Obesity prevention in children; Pediatric MD of Technology Nutrition; Adult and Adolescent Nutrition Univ of best practices Pennsylvania

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 237 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Prevention & Community Health 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Academic Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Degrees Conferred Earned M. Edberg Associate Professor T 1.0 PhD Univ of Virginia Cultural Anthropology Doctoral Seminar- Latino Immigrant/Refugee Health Disparities; MA Univ of Political Social/Behavioral Theory; Co-occurring disparities of substance abuse, MA California -LA Science/International Principles of Health Education youth violence, & sexual risk American Univ Relations & Health Promo; Impact of Applied Anthropology Culture upon Health; Qualitative Methods in Health Promo; High Risk & Special Populations D. Evans Professor T 1.0 PhD Johns Hopkins Cognitive Science Intro to Public Health Comm & Prevention intervention research; Evaluating MA Univ Mrktg; Mrktg Research for PH; behavior change and public education PH Branding Theory & Practice intervention programs using communication and marketing strategies; Using digital media to deliver and evaluate health communication and marketing interventions

J. Franz Adjunct Instructor N 0.5 N/A N/A N/A Intro to Public Health Social marketing for work health C. Assistant Professor TR 1.0 PhD Uniformed Medical Psychology Community-based Investigating epidemiological factors, Harrington MPH Services Univ of Epidemiology Participatory Research; psychological factors and individual MS Health Sciences Medical Psychology Preventing Health Disparities psychosocial factors and their interaction on development, progression and maintenance of chronic illness; Variable influence of race on psychosocial and environmental factors as it relates to chronic illness

T. Henry Visiting Assistant N 1.0 EdD Columbia Univ Health Education & Intro to Public Health; Monitor and evaluation of HIV/AIDS Professor Behavior Principles of Health Education programs; High risk behaviors; Health & Health Promotion; Human Disparities; Chronic diseases in risk Sexuality; Preventing Health populations; Access to Healthcare Disparities; Social & Behavioral Health

K. Horn Professor T 1.0 EdD West Virginia Educational Psychology Research Mentorship Program Smoking cessation; Juvenile mentorship. MSW Univ

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 238 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Prevention & Community Health 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Academic Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Degrees Conferred Earned S. Hull Assistant Professor TR 1.0 PhD Univ of Communication N/A Health communication, mass communication, Pennsylvania message design, public communication programs, health disparities, media effects

M. Long Assistant Professor TR 1.0 DrS Harvard Univ Public Health N/A Childhood obesity preventions and cost MPH Yale Univ effectiveness

K. Associate Professor T 1.0 PhD Johns Hopkins Public Health Maternal and Child Health I: Community health, health behavior & McDonnell Univ Foundations; Evaluation of Maternal & Child Health; Using games for Health Promotion Programs; health, development & evaluation of Doctoral Seminar in Health community based PH programs; Culture & Behavior; Doctoral Research gender based violence, children's safety & Methods I; Doctoral Research injury prevention; Factors affecting quality of Methods II life among women with HIV

M. Associate Professor T 1.0 PhD Duke Univ Clinical Psychology Planning & Administration of Evidence-based psychosocial interventions Napolitano Health Promotion Programs; for physical activity and weight management; Maternal & Child Health Effective interventions for disease prevention at both individual level and community-level; Media technology interventions

E. Parrish Assistant Professor N 1.0 PhD Capella Univ Organization & Mgmt Community Health HIV/AIDS MA Univ of Texas Humanities Management; Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship

O. Acosta Associate Professor N 1.0 PhD State Univ of Clinical Psychology Promotion of Mental Health Children’s mental health; Prevention; Price MA New York- Clinical Psychology Community violence; Cultural competence; Buffalo Program development & evaluation State Univ of New York- Buffalo R. Rimal Professor T 1.0 PhD So Illinois Univ Journalism and Mass Health Communication HIV stigma and preventions through the use MA Stanford Univ Communication; of mass media in sub-Saharan Africa; Tobacco Communication policy in India

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 239 Template 4.1.1 Primary Faculty: Department of Prevention & Community Health 2015-16 (continued) Name Title/ Academic Tenure FTE All Institution Specific Discipline of Current GW Teaching Area(s) Research Interest (If applicable) Rank Status Graduate Degree Degree(s) (Course Names) Degrees Conferred Earned K. Roche Associate T 1.0 PhD Johns Hopkins Maternal Child Health Child Development & Public Intersecting influences of culture, parenting, Professor MSW Univ Social Work Health & neighborhoods on health-risk behaviors & Univ of Georgia well-being of low-income, urban youth & recent immigrant Latino immigrant adolescents M. Ruiz Assistant Research N 1.0 PhD Univ of So Preventive Medicine Adolescent Health; HIV prevention issues including self-disclosure Professor MPH California Epidemiology Approaches to HIV of HIV infection to sexual partners, HIV Univ of Prevention; An prevention in correctional systems & California - Interdisciplinary Overview microbicide acceptability; Non-vaccine HIV Berkeley prevention strategies; HIV in correctional systems; Syringe exchange policies

C. Sparks Associate N 1.0 PhD Ohio State Univ Psychology Health Promotion in Health Mental health curriculum for the elderly; PH Professor MA Tulane Univ History Care Settings; Planning & advocacy; Exercise for seniors; HIV/AIDS; Administration of Health Tobacco cessation Promotion Disease Prevention Programs; Evaluation of Health Promotion Disease Prevention Programs; Community Organization, Development & Advocacy F. Associate TR 1.0 MD Cornell Univ Public Health COPC Principles in Practice Designing health innovations that improve Spielberg Professor MPH Univ of health outcomes & patient satisfaction while Washington lowering health care costs

M. Turner Associate T 1.0 PhD Michigan State Communication Social Marketing: Theory & Message design and cognitive processing of Professor MA Univ Practice risk and health related messages; Impact of emotions on cognitive processing of persuasive messages. A. Vyas Associate T 1.0 PhD Johns Hopkins Population Dynamics Social and Behavioral Reproductive health, immigrant health & Professor MHS Univ Demography Approaches to Public Health; disease prevention & health promotion in Adolescent Health; adolescent populations; Multi-level influences Reproductive Health on pregnancy ambivalence, contraceptive use & unintended pregnancy among adolescents

● Included here are all Primary faculty to include regular full-time, regular part-time, Research and Visiting faculty appointments. Some of these faculty have no teaching/administrative salary support; however, they support educational activities ● T= Tenure; TR= Tenure Track; N= Non Tenure

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 240 Gender and Tenure Status. Table 4.1.a. below presents summary statistics regarding gender and tenure distribution in each department as of Fall 2015. Since the last accreditation cycle, the SPH has made significant progress in both the total number of tenured and tenure track faculty, as well as the representation of women in these categories. Under the leadership of Dr. Tielsch, the Department of Global Health (GH) continues to build tenure and rank distribution. Of note, the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Epi/Bio) includes faculty in the Biostatistics Center in Rockville, MD. (http://www.bsc.GW.edu/bsc/index.php) Because the Center functions almost completely on soft money, none of these faculty members are tenure track. Many of these faculty members contribute to the educational mission of the SPH primarily through mentorship of MPH, MS, and PhD students in Epi/Bio and more recently to the teaching of on-campus classes. When the SPH separated from the Medical Center and developed its own bylaws, the faculty voted to support the inclusion of research faculty among the ranks of the regular faculty with full rights and responsibilities of school-wide governance.

Table 4.1.a.: Summary of Gender and Tenure Status Department Tenured Tenure Track Regular Non- TT Research Non-TT TOTALS Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female EOH 2 2 1 4 3 0 0 0 12 EPI/BIO 3 2 0 5 2 3 4 11 30 EXNS 0 4 0 1 4 4 0 0 13 GH 2 1 2 5 2 1 0 0 13 HPM 4 6 2 6 5 2 0 5 30 PCH 5 7 1 3 1 3 0 2 22 Total by Gender 16 22 6 24 17 13 4 18 120 Percent 42% 58% 20% 80% 57% 43% 18% 82% Note- Summary of Fall 2015 gender and tenure status, full-time, regular faculty only, including LOA’s. Does not include those faculty who have a primary appointment with the SPH, but are not full time in the School. . 4.1.b. If the school uses other faculty (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.), summary data on their qualifications should be provided in table format, organized by department, specialty area or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school and must include at least the following: a) name, b) title/academic rank, c) title and current employment, d) FTE or % time allocated to the school, e) gender, f) race, g) highest degree earned (optional: schools may also list all graduate degrees earned to more accurately reflect faculty expertise), h) disciplines in which listed degrees were earned, i) contributions to the school. See CEPH Data Template 4.1.2.

Qualifications of other faculty members involved in our teaching programs such as limited service (LS) faculty (lecturer, professorial lecturer, adjunct instructor, adjunct professor), and secondary appointments (either full or part-time faculty with a primary appointment in another school within the university) are presented in CEPH Data Template 4.1.2. Find this template in ERF 4.1.b.: 4.1.2. CEPH Data Template-Other Faculty along with Other Faculty Curriculum Vitae. A full description of faculty appointment categories can be found in the Faculty

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 241 Code http://www.GW.edu/~facsen/faculty_senate/pdf/2004Code.pdf. The number of additional faculty has grown over the past few years. Two major areas where we rely heavily on other faculty include undergraduate course offerings and our online programs. Generally, regular, full-time faculty teach core courses rather than other faculty, even though other faculty often play a role in co-instruction. Other faculty are used primarily for electives and special topic areas to strengthen the overall teaching portfolio.

Part of the commitment that the School has to the university at large is to provide education and access to lifelong health promotion. As such, we offer a wide range of courses for the undergraduate population, including Health and Wellness (HLWL) and Lifestyle, Sport and Physical Activity (LSPA) courses. We also offer free yoga, zumba and metabolic effects classes to the university community. The vast majority of these courses are led by limited service (LS) faculty in Exercise and Nutrition Sciences.

The online programs launched in 2013 (MPH@GW) and 2014 (MHA@GW) have experienced steady and strong growth. These programs are designed as a “flipped” classroom model where one or more of our full-time, regular faculty have designed and pre-recorded asynchronously delivered material; students are required to view a synchronous session each week. Required weekly synchronous sessions (SS) are held in groups of 15 or smaller to review course material; apply concepts; and work in teams. Each of these sessions requires a faculty member to guide the discussion and evaluate the students. While regular faculty teach some of these sessions, most SS faculty are from our non-primary faculty groups. These other faculty members go through the same appointment process as our limited service and/or adjunct faculty, some who live outside of the DC metropolitan area. For certain courses, especially those in the MHA@GW program, some of the other faculty SS leaders are selected on the basis of being well- established practitioners. In Table 4.1.b.1 below we have highlighted the qualifications of a small subset of these faculty members.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 242 Table 4.1.b.1. Selected Limited Service Faculty Who Support Degree Offerings Across Programs Name Dept Academi Current Title and Grad Area of Teaching c Rank Employer Degree Expertise area Earned H. Hughes EOH Prof PH Preparedness Analyst, DrPH, EOH Sustainability Lecturer Dept of Homeland MPH Security; Public Health Officer E. Rand EOH Lecturer Specialist, World Bank MBA, Engineering, WASH MPH Business, PH G. Andreotti Epi/ Prof Epidemiologist, National PhD, Epidemiology Epidemiology Bio Lecturer Cancer Institute MPH

D.Hoffman Epi/ Emeritus GW PhD, Epidemiology Epidemiology Bio Professor MSPH C. Ogden Epi/ Prof Epidemiologist/NHANES PhD City/ Nutrition and Bio Lecturer Analyst, CDC Regional Obesity Epi Planning E. Epi/ Prof Senior Biostatistician, E. PhD Biostatistics Biostatistics Nyirabahizi Bio Lecturer Glasser Pediatric AIDS Foundation N. Bowes EXNS Lecturer CEO & Founder, SPG, Inc PhD Sports Psych Sports Psych J. Claros GH Prof UN World Food Prog MD, GH Policy Comparative Lecturer MPH Health Systems D. HPM Lecturer President, Woodrum, Inc MBA Health Care Intro to Am Woodrum Admin Care System J. Espinosa HPM Asst Res Principal Health Care JD, MA, Law, Gender Health Policy Prof Policy Analyst; Center for LLM studies Transforming Health J. Willey PCH Prof Principal, JBS Int’l, Inc PhD Research Program Lecturer Methods & Evaluation Comp Politics A. Corey PCH Prof Associate Professor- PhD, MS Nursing Social & Lecturer Valparaiso Univ Behavior Approaches to PH

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 243 4.1.c. Description of the manner in which the faculty complement integrates perspectives from the field of practice, including information on appointment tracks for practitioners, if used by the school. Faculty with significant practice experience outside of that which is typically associated with an academic career should also be identified.

As highlighted in our strategic plan, one of our core values centers on practice – through a commitment “to translate public health evidence to policy, to evaluate public health policies, and to develop the public health workforce.” While the SPH does not have a practice category for faculty appointments at this time, practice experience is considered when faculty are reviewed and hired.

To support this pillar of our mission, the SPH hired Pierre Vigilance, MD., MPH, as the first Associate Dean for Public Health Practice, in June 2013. Dr. Vigilance joined the SPH with more than 20 years of experience in public health leadership, programming, and administration. Prior to joining the SPH, Dr. Vigilance served as the Director of the District of Columbia Department of Health, Director of the Baltimore Country Department of Health and as the Assistant Commissioner for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention in Baltimore City. Since assuming this role, Dr. Vigilance has expanded the practice preceptor network and preceptor sites in addition to working to engage and foster community relationships. Under Dr. Vigilance’s leadership, all practicum directors meet monthly to discuss and develop policies related to the public health practice experience. These practicum directors represent the departments, in addition to bringing significant and deep practice experience to the SPH. (See Tables 4.1.c.1 and 4.1.c.2 below.)

The School of Public Health is auspiciously located in the nation’s capital. As such, we have tremendous access to experts from both the federal and private sectors to serve as panelists for forums and symposia, guest lectures for numerous courses, and even as faculty for group discussions or to lead a course.

Our location and mission also allows us to recruit faculty and staff with significant public health leadership experience from both federal and non-federal agencies. Some of the organizations in which our full time faculty either worked in or consulted for, are included in Table 4.1.c.1 below. Furthermore, many of our faculty members are involved in sponsored projects which are primarily practice-oriented (see Criterion 3.2).

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 244 Table 4.1.c.1. Examples of Primary Faculty Practice Experience Department Overview of Practice Experience of Primary Faculty

Epi/Bio CDC, DC Department of Health, Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, APHL, Peace Corps

EOH IOM, EDF, National Academy of Sciences, USAID, EPA, OSHA, NCEH/ATSDR, Center for Construction Research and Training (CPWR), Nicaraguan Health Clinic, Empower DC, Dept of Energy, Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, Citizens for Clean Air

EXNS Private Practice Clinic, EIS officer CDC, Urban Food Task Force

GH Latin America community programs, USDA, Int’l Scientific Organizations, Ethiopian Gov’t, National Center for Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (CDC), Global Fund, Pew Commission, EIS officer CDC, USAID, World Bank, Westat Inc., Joint Health Venture, Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, Save the Children USA, DC and Baltimore County Depts of Health, WHO, CDC, MOH in Somalia, Michigan State Health Dept., Health Policy R&D, Mexico’s Ministry of Public Health, PAHO/WHO

HPM NoVa Neighborhood Health, Nat'l Council on Creative Aging, FDA, WHO; INGO, Pres, Nat'l Capital Health, Am Col of HC Executives; Int'l Acad Methodology Council, White House, Office of the Vice President, US Court of Appeals, US Army Medical Dept, US Senate Committee on Finance, US Dept of State, Urban Institute, Wisconsin Div of Health, Marshfield Clinic, Intergovernmental Health Policy Project, Washington Business Group of Health, Institute for Women’s Policy Research, Bureau of Health Professions in HRSA, Academy Health, Pan American Health Organization, Province of Buenos Aires, Nat’l Public Health and Hospital Institute, Economic and Social Research Institute, American Health Quality Association, Legal Ethics Committee (DC), Office of Policy CMS, AdvaMed, US Dept of HHS, FDA PCH CDC, IOM, UNICEF, HHS, Foundation for AIDS Research, Global India Fund, RTI International, NIAID

The practice experience of our LS faculty is also quite extensive. In Table 4.1.c.2 we list examples of practice experience for these faculty members.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 245 Table 4.1.c.2. Examples of Other Faculty Practice Experience Department Overview of Practice Experience Depth of LS Faculty

EOH Dept of Energy, CA EPA, MD Dept of Health, NC State Lab for PH, CDC, NJ Dept of Health, EPA, Mine Safety & Health Admin

Epi/Bio CDC, NCHS, USAID, DC Mary’s Center, Global Aids Program, FDA, Washington State DOH, DC Department of the Environment, Agricultural Health Study, NIH, EGPFA, Global Aids Program, National Cancer Institute

EXNS HHS, Children’s National Medical Ctr, Kids Safe & Healthful Foods, Pew Charitable Trusts, AHA, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Women’s Media Center, Americorps, ORISE, US Surgeon General, NCHS, Capitol Area Food Bank, DC Mary’s Center, CDC, AMURT

GH RAPIDD, Fogarty International Center, U.S. Public Health Service, UNICEF, United Nations, NYC Dept of Health & Mental Hygiene, US HHS, US Air Force Office of Surgeon General, ICRW, Whitman-Walker Clinic

HPM Boston City Hospital, National Assoc of Medicaid Directors, Urban Institute, Avalere Health, HHS, National Commission on AIDS, Pew Charitable Trust, DC Dept of Health, GW Cancer Institute, Health for Humanity, Peace Corp, AHCA, DDOE, CDC, EPA, Anne Arundal General Hospital, Monongolia General Hospital, Kind Fahad Hospital (Saudi Arabia), Saudi Arabia Ministries of Health, US Agency for International Development, GW Hospital, American Hospital Association

PCH MD For Latino Immigrants, Washington PH Association, ISCOPES, City of Alexandria’s Commission on Aging, NIH, CDC, American Diabetes Association, National Sexual Violence Resource Center, Dept of HHS-Canada

4.1.d. Identification of measureable objectives by which the school assesses the qualifications of its faculty complement, along with data regarding the performance of the school against those measures for each of the last three years.

When the SPH separated from the Medical Center in 2011, new bylaws and governance structures were created through a collaborative and transparent process. The SPH faculty assembly voted to approve all of these documents, including the SPH’s Appointment, Promotion and Tenure Guidelines (APT). These guidelines, as well as the University Faculty Code and Faculty Handbook, are posted on the SPH faculty resources site: http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/faculty. Our assessment of faculty qualifications is based on these governing documents. The SPH and our departmental APT Guidelines articulate the criteria we need to consider when assessing a faculty member’s achievement and productivity in relation to teaching, research, service and public health practice. The Guidelines apply to tenure-

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 246 accruing, non-tenure accruing and research faculty. To provide additional guidance to faculty, departments are encouraged to establish their own criteria in order to present more discipline-focused specificity to the SPH APT Guidelines. The department criteria are currently being modified but current versions can be found in ERF 4.1.d.: Department APT Criteria. Through the departmental and school- wide APT criteria we are able to assure the excellence of our faculty.

Each department is responsible for recruitment and vetting of part-time and LS faculty. New ‘Other’ faculty members are identified primarily through professional networks, our program graduates, and by individual inquiry from faculty who are looking for part-time teaching opportunities. Other paid faculty- either paid to teach by the course or regular part-time faculty who teach across the GW - are members of the SEIU Local 500 and governed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement, which is reviewed and renewed every two years. LS faculty who are paid to teach by the course and who do not hold terminal degrees but who have a level of work experience that meets the departments’ quality measures can be appointed at the rank of “lecturer;” those with a terminal degree are appointed at the rank of “professorial lecturer” with the minimum salary defined by the SEIU. For those who are hired to teach as well as hold required administrative duties within the department in addition to advising students and do not hold a terminal degree, but have a level of work experience that meets the departments’ quality measures, are appointed at the rank of “adjunct instructor.” Those with a terminal degree are appointed at the rank of “adjunct professor” with the minimum salary also defined by the SEIU.

All full-time and part-time faculty appointed at the rank of Assistant Professor and higher, must have a terminal degree. Those who do not have a terminal degree will be appointed at the non-tenure rank of “instructor.”

Table 4.1.d.1: Assessment of Faculty Qualifications Outcome measure Target FY013 FY014 FY015

Percent of regular, full-time faculty with earned 100% 99% 99% 99% doctorate or other terminal degree. Percent of primary faculty with public health >50% 75% 75% 82% practice experience. (self-identified) Percent of course instructors rated as good to 100% 77% 76% 86% excellent. (Using spring 2015 course evaluations.)* Hit rate on grants. >40% 45% 49% 40%

*See Criteria 4.2.d. for more information on course evaluations.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 247 4.1.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Significant growth in tenured faculty over the past three years • Increase in number of faculty with extensive academic and practice backgrounds. • Increase in both proposal submission and dollars awarded. • Faculty with deep expertise and knowledge in core areas.

Challenges: • We are continuing to build our faculty in EXNS and GH. • Grow a well qualified faculty for the MPH@GW program. • Recruitment of faculty with specialized expertise in areas of laboratory sciences, health economics, chronic disease epidemiology and biostatistics is a constant challenge and a great need for SPH’s growth in both research and teaching.

Future Plans: • Hire more mid-level faculty in the Departments of Global Health and EXNS. • Targeted faculty recruitment in cancer epidemiology, laboratory sciences, health economics and (possibly) biostatistics as we build demand for teaching. • Hire a full time recruiter to support the growth of the School’s educational offerings.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 248 4.2. FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. THE SCHOOL SHALL HAVE WELL-DEFINED POLICIES AND PROCEDURES TO RECRUIT, APPOINT AND PROMOTE QUALIFIED FACULTY, TO EVALUATE, COMPETENCE AND PERFORMANCE OF FACULTY, AND TO SUPPORT THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND ADVANCEMENT OF FACULTY.

4.2.a. A faculty handbook or other written document that outlines faculty rules and regulations.

All components of our “faculty handbook” appear on the SPH website where we maintain a faculty resources page that includes faculty governance documents, academic and administrative resources, and policies and general information: http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/faculty.

Academic resources on our website include the academic calendar; final exam schedule; classroom technology and blackboard use; counseling and disability support services; and the library resources and writing center: http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/faculty/academic-resources. Faculty responsibilities can be found at: http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/faculty/responsibilities. The faculty governance page includes policies from both the university and the SPH: http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/faculty/governance.

All faculty are required to attend an orientation program providing information related to the university administration, history, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Provost’s Office holds an annual day- long orientation for new faculty to familiarize them with policies, resources and other important information. New faculty who will also serve in the role of assistant or associate dean, or department chair, are invited to participate in an administrative orientation offered by the Provost. SPH also maintains a webpage for career development opportunities: http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/faculty/career-development.

All faculty are encouraged to participate in the governance of both the University and the SPH. The Faculty Senate is the governing body of the University. The SPH holds three of the 40 senate seats each year. For AY 2015/16 our senators are Rebecca Katz, Karen McDonnell and Rajiv Rimal. The Dean is a standing Administrative Member of the Senate. Karen McDonnell is a member of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee. Details of the standing committees, agenda, faculty organization plan and faculty code can be found at: http://www.GW.edu/~facsen/

4.2.b. Description of provisions for faculty development, including identification of support for faculty categories other than regular full-time appointments.

In addition to the resources listed above, the SPH orients new faculty through a “New Boots” one day event conducted by Associate Deans Horn, DeLoia and Vigilance at the beginning of each year. The purpose of the event is to help new faculty acclimate to academia and to become familiar with university and SPH policies, procedures, and resources. The Himmelfarb Library offers workshops to orient faculty to library resources and search tools; they also conduct individual faculty consultations: http://himmelfarb.GW.edu/. Departments connect new faculty members to mentors who help guide their development as both teachers and researchers.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 249 Opportunities for faculty development involving research are offered through the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) for all those interested in developing research programs. Training materials are available online and through regular workshops: http://research.GW.edu/about. In addition, under the direction of Dean Horn, the SPH has developed a robust program for faculty research advancement (See Criteria 3.61.a).

The University Teaching and Learning Center (TLC) offers both individualized support and group workshops. Private consultation is available for course planning, as well as help with production of an online or hybrid course: http://tlc.provost.GW.edu/teaching-guide. Attendance of any workshop through the TLC is acknowledged in the annual faculty review process. The services of the TLC are available and encouraged for all faculty. Online instructors receive considerable training on the learning management system, as well as attending weekly meetings for individual course faculty. SPH hired a full time Director of Online Learning to assist faculty with both course development and on incorporating technology into classroom development and learning assessment. The Director of Online Learning is available to consult with all faculty, not just online faculty. Most departments provide faculty mentorship, in the form of co-teaching a course and/or peer evaluation, for new educators.

4.2.c. Description of formal procedures for evaluating faculty competence and performance.

New Faculty Hires

All full-time faculty at the rank of associate professor and professor (non-tenure as well as tenure- accruing) must be approved at both the department and school level through the respective APT committees prior to being approved by the Dean and recommended to the Provost. The Provost makes faculty appointments. The Board of Trustees grants tenure upon recommendation by the Provost. Search committees are convened based on the Faculty Code as well as department and school bylaws. This ensures those who serve in this capacity are able to assess the qualifications of all new faculty appointees. Departments are encouraged to form a diverse search committee and to write a position announcement that will attract a broad and diverse pool of applicants. Each search committee is required to appoint one voting member to serve as the diversity advocate. This person serves as a resource and champion for a fair and inclusive search process, helps to promote consistency in the application of procedures, raises awareness about guarding against unconscious and unintentional bias and encourages diversity in the group of candidates recommended to the dean for interviews. Training and support of diversity advocates is a shared responsibility between the Office of Diversity and Inclusion and the Office of Faculty Recruitment and Personnel Relations. All full-time faculty searches must be advertised for a minimum of 30 days prior to application reviews. This University policy helps to ensure a qualified applicant pool. All full-time faculty hires must go through a background check prior to final appointment. While hiring methods vary somewhat, candidates are generally required to present a departmental seminar and sometimes guest lecture in a course for which they may be expected to be the lead instructor. Departmental faculty who attend the seminar are invited to evaluate the candidates.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 250

Annual Review

Each year every full-time regular, research or special service faculty member participates in an annual review process. The review includes a comprehensive self-assessment, an assessment by the department chair, and a review by the Dean. Research productivity, course evaluations, public health practice and service are reviewed and discussed. Goals for the upcoming year are mutually developed and used in the following year’s assessment as a measure of productivity. The Chair reviews these reports with the Dean. Individual faculty’s needs for mentoring, additional training and other types of support are identified and a plan is put into place.

For faculty in the tenure track, a midpoint evaluation is strongly recommended. This evaluation consists of the faculty member preparing his/her dossier (or an abbreviated version depending on the department guidelines) for review by three or more senior members of the departmental APT committee. A written report is provided to the department chair who then meets with the tenure track faculty to discuss the faculty member’s progress towards tenure and to offer guidance as needed to help ensure a successful tenure review. Additional faculty development and mentoring to strengthen any identified weaknesses are arranged at this time.

4.2.d. Description of the processes used for student course evaluation and evaluation of instructional effectiveness.

Outstanding performance in teaching is valued at all levels in the School. In most departments, the faculty recruitment process requires candidates to not only present a seminar but also have their performance in the classroom observed by the departmental search committee to identify candidates who are effective educators.

Course Evaluations

Students are asked to complete online course evaluations at the end of each term. These evaluations are reviewed by department Chairs and/or Vice-Chairs, the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and the Dean. Faculty who receive below-average evaluations are informed and coached. This coaching can be with the TLC staff, the Director of Online Education, the Chair, or the Associate Dean. In rare cases where a faculty member repeatedly scores below average, even after coaching and mentoring, we can remove the faculty member from being a lead course instructor.

For the online program, we use student surveys to collect course evaluation data throughout the term. If we learn that a synchronous session leader is struggling, we can review session recordings and offer immediate intervention. Synchronous session leaders who do not improve after coaching are not invited back.

For residential classes we use the university system. Prior to 2013, the School used the School of Medicine and Health Sciences course evaluation program. This evaluation came in the form of a PDF,

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 251 making it difficult to search and collate data. We moved to the university system for course evaluations in 2013, which, although an improvement, still lacked built-in analytics.

This past year, the University purchased SmartEval software http://info.smartevals.com/index.aspx. This software supports data analytics that will be useful for helping faculty to improve their teaching, such as tracking faculty evaluations through time, allowing individualized questions for a course, and tracking data on student achievement. This new evaluation software was piloted in Spring 2015 for the residential courses. Since then, SmartEval has been used for evaluation of all courses, including those in our online programs. See ERF 4.2.d.: Course Evaluation Samples- Spring 2015.

4.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • Clearly articulated and accessible faculty policies. • Culture of excellence in teaching at all levels and selection of faculty who have strong teaching skills. • Real-time teacher evaluation data and interventions for online courses. • Commitment to faculty development and career advancement at multiple levels. • Mentoring is tailored to the needs of faculty in disparate fields. • Annual review of faculty.

Challenges: • Faculty mentoring is variable between departments • Difficulty assembling and analyzing long term data on course evaluations and faculty because of changes in data collection and reporting platforms for residential courses. • Course evaluation system for residential programs has had no built-in analytic capabilities. • Variable, often low, response rates for course evaluations for residential courses.

Future Plans: • Develop school-wide faculty mentoring policies. • Create a course on teaching online for all participating faculty. • Explore a peer evaluation system for teaching.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 252 4.3. STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS. THE SCHOOL SHALL HAVE STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS POLICIES AND PROCEDURES TO LOCATE AND SELECT QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS CAPABLE OF TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE SCHOOL’S VARIOUS LEARNING ACTIVITIES, WHICH WILL ENABLE EACH OF THEM TO DEVELOP COMPETENCE FOR A CAREER IN PUBLIC HEALTH.

4.3.a. Description of the school’s recruitment policies and procedures. If these differ by degree (e.g., bachelor’s vs. graduate degrees), a description should be provided for each.

Recruitment efforts by the SPH Office of Admissions and Recruitment address the breadth of GW program offerings including undergraduate and graduate programs, residential, online, and hybrid programs.

The SPH seeks academically qualified students with a demonstrated passion for public health. The Office of Admissions employs a full-cycle recruitment strategy to attract talented public health students and raise awareness of the SPH’s program offerings, providing multiple points of access for the prospective students to familiarize themselves with the SPH. These initiatives include, but are not limited to:

• Internal Open House Events • Informational Webinars • Admissions Counselor Appointments: http://publichealth.GW.edu/admissions/admissions-one-one-sessions • Student Ambassador Sessions & School Tours: http://publichealth.GW.edu/content/admissions-group-info-sessions • Department Outreach • External Outreach Events (See ERF 4.3.a: Admissions Recruitment Travel Schedule) • SOPHAS Virtual Events • Diversity Recruitment: The Office of Admissions annually participates in a variety of events targeting under represented student populations. These include the Tri-State Health Fair, a graduate fair hosted by the pre-medical, dental and public health summer programs of Yale, Columbia and Rutgers Universities and attended by minority students at various stages of the undergraduate level, the UC Davis Pre-Medical & Pre-Health Professions Conference which focuses student attendance to those typically underrepresented in healthcare (with regard to gender, economic, social, educational, linguistic, cultural, racial, and ethnic background), and the Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students (ABRCMS). In addition, the Office of Admissions has hosted ad-hoc campus visits for minority-based visiting student groups, such as McNair Fellows. Additional outreach is conducted to diverse newly admitted students, including inviting them to the GW Black Public Health Student Network Annual Minority Health Conference, without requiring them to commit to GW. • Student-to-Applicant Partner Outreach • Admitted Student Events: Details of recruitment events can be found in ERF 4.3.a.: Recruitment Events.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 253 The Office of Admissions works with the Office of Communications in the creation of print material, primarily the student prospectus (ERF 4.3.a: School Academic Prospectus). The student prospectus is a robust guide to the SPH, its departments, research activities and university culture. Along with print material, we use a parallel digital communication plan to prospective and admitted students. The prospective student email campaign primarily centers on monthly admissions newsletters, covering upcoming deadlines and application information; links to campus visits; events; and recruitment travel calendar, as well as pertinent SPH news stories. Additional email campaigns to students include department-specific newsletters, event invitations, and application reminders.

Once students have been admitted to the program, they receive a series of welcome emails from key offices and personnel. These communications include reminders about commitment processess, as well as additional information which complement the yield cycle (e.g. invitations to admitted student events, opportunities to speak with student ambassadors, fellowship and internship announcements, housing suggestions, orientation information, etc.). These outreach messages are reiterated via posts to the admitted student Facebook group (a private, invite-only social media page) which provides an open forum for admitted students to engage with the Office of Admissions, student ambassadors, and their fellow admitted students.

4.3.b. Statement of admissions policies and procedures. If these differ by degree (e.g., bachelor’s vs, graduate degrees), a description should be provided for each.

The SPH Office of Admissions and Recruitment builds the pipeline for enrollment into the residential graduate and undergraduate public health programs for the SPH. In addition, this office works with the university undergraduate admissions team responsible for the admissions process for programs in the Exercise and Nutrition Sciences (EXNS) department for both first year and transfer applications. 2U, Inc., the online partner for the MPH@GW and MHA@GW programs, performs the recruiting activities for these two programs.

The Office of Admissions is governed by policies established by the SPH Admissions Committee, a faculty committee made up of one voting representative from each department and the online program (see Criteria 1.5.a.), for graduate level programs, and the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee for the BS in PH.

Undergraduate Admissions The SPH offers two Bachelor of Science (BS) degrees: Exercise Science and Public Health. Each program has a different admissions process. The recruitment and application processing for the BS Exercise Science program is managed through the GW Undergraduate Admissions Office using the Common Application (https://www.commonapp.org/).

Entry into the BS Public Health program is managed through the SPH Office of Admissions and Recruitment. SPH has two admissions cycles for the BS Public Health; one in the fall; and one in the spring. Students who apply, but are not accepted during the fall admissions cycle, will be automatically

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 254 included in the spring semester applicant pool. Students who have at least 45 credits of coursework completed with a GPA above 3.0, may apply for admission into this competitive program. Applicants are required to provide their transcripts; two brief essays; a resume; and an internal application (http://publichealth.GW.edu/pdf/SPH_transfer_within_application.pdf). A faculty committee led by the Undergraduate BS Public Health Program Director reviews all applications and selects the cohort. In March, students admitted to the BS PH program may opt to be considered for the joint five-year BS/MPH program. This pool of candidates are interviewed by the Program Director and selected for admission.

Graduate Admissions The graduate residential programs accept applications through the Schools of Public Health Application Service (SOPHAS) website (www.sophas.org). The standard application requirements include official transcripts from all universities; two letters of recommendation; official GRE, GMAT, MCAT or LSAT scores; a statement of purpose and a resume. Doctoral applicants must also include a third letter of recommendation. International students are required to submit an official transcript evaluation from a NACES member organization and official TOEFL or IELTS scores. Applicants for the both MHA programs are required to complete an interview as well.

Standardized exam waiver. Applicants to masters degree programs with a prior advanced degree may waive the GRE. International students who have completed their undergraduate degree at a US institution, are native English speakers, or who have studied in a country where the official language is English, may waive the English language exam.

The MPH@GW program admissions process mimics the residential process with two distinct differences: first, instead of using SOPHAS, online students apply through an online application system managed by 2U (https://apply.publichealthonline.GW.edu); second, 2U works with the applicants until applications are complete, at which point they are forwarded to the Office of Admissions for decisions.

Graduate admissions decisions for specific programs are made at the departmental level. Departments may elect for the Office of Admissions to automatically issue admit or deny decisions based on specific criteria that they have identified for their Department. The Office of Admissions reviews all applications for auto-admit criteria. Those applicants requiring full review are sent to relevant departmental faculty. Criteria for admissions into the masters and doctoral programs are presented in ERF 4.3.b.: Graduate Admissions Requirements and Minimum Admissions Standards.

Master of Health Administration – Executive Program The Executive Master of Health Administration (MHA@GW) is similar to the MPH@GW application process in that the application is processed through an online application managed by 2U (https://apply.mha.GW.edu/). There is no auto-admission standard for this program; once an application is complete, it is reviewed by relevant faculty.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 255 The application requirements for the executive MHA@GW program differ from the residential MHA program in that applicants are required to have at least three years of relevant work experience; the GRE is not required for admission.

Joint Programs See the Instructional Matrix in Criteria 2.1.a for a list of the SPH joint programs. Applicants to the, JD-, MD- or MA-MPH must apply to both schools simultaneously. If a student is admitted into both schools, the student may pursue the joint program. Two exceptions include the Physician’s Assistant (PA)-MPH and the Certificate in Healthcare Corporate Compliance (HCC)-MPH/MS/MHA . Applicants to the joint PA-MPH program only apply through the PA application system (https://caspa.liaisoncas.com/). The administrators for the PA program share the applications with the SPH Office of Admissions, where applications are vetted for admission to the MPH program. Faculty members from the SPH participate in the interview process for these applicants and notify the Office of Admissions of admission decisions. Similarly, applicants to the HCC Certificate program only apply through GW’s College of Professional Studies (http://cps.gwu.edu/).

Peace Corps Masters International The SPH participates in the Peace Corps Master’s International program (http://www.peacecorps.gov/volunteer/graduate/mastersint/). Students interested in the program apply to the MPH program first. After admission, students then apply for the Peace Corps programs at least one year before they wish to deploy. Any student accepted into both the Peace Corps and the MPH program may graduate with a MI/MPH degree.

Re-Admission Students can fall out of status in three ways; 1) by not registering for courses; 2) by requesting a leave of absence during a continuous spring or fall semester; and 3) by being suspended. Until fall 2015, students petitioned for readmission through an online petition form: (https://publichealth.GW.edu/pdf/Graduate%20Admissions%20Petition.pdf). Beginning in fall 2015, students will use either a web form or SOPHAS Express to petition for readmission, depending on their last term of enrollment. See the SPH Graduate Student Handbook for details regarding the Readmission policies: http://publichealth.GW.edu/pdf/Handbook.pdf.

4.3.c. Examples of recruitment materials and other publications and advertising that describe, at a minimum, academic calendars, grading and the academic offerings by the school. If a school does not have a printed bulletin/catalog, it must provide a printed web page that indicates the degree requirements as the official representation of the school. In addition, references to website addresses may be included.

The Academic pages of the SPH website (http://publichealth.GW.edu/academics) provide complete program information about each program offered by the SPH. The information here includes contact

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 256 information for applicable program directors and practicum directors (where applicable), and program overview along with the curricular requirements. Archived program guides are available to students for each specific program as well.

An additional resource is the University Bulletin (http://www.bulletin.GW.edu/). University and school- specific policies, courses, and program-specific information are all available in the Bulletin. The University Bulletin is published online once per Academic Year (AY). Students can find the AY academic calendar in the Bulletin, or go to: http://www.GW.edu/academic-calendar. The academic calendar for MPH@GW can be found at: https://publichealthonline.gwu.edu/academics/academic-calendar/, and the calendar for MHA@GW at https://mha.gwu.edu/academics/academic-calendar/.

The GW website has numerous resources for students, alumni, recruits, and the general community. Policies, procedures, links to forms, contact information and general information can be found for areas including Disability Support, Emergency Preparedness and Response, and Counseling.

ERF 4.3.a: School Academic Prospectus is the guide used for recruitment. Information about the SPH and our programs are summarized and presented in a different format.

• Online Appointment Booking Calendar for One-on-One or Group Information Sessions: http://publichealth.GW.edu/admissions/visits • Graduate Student Ambassadors: http://publichealth.GW.edu/content/meet-milken-institute- sphs-fall-2014-student-ambassadors • Recruitment Events University-wide, including SPH: http://graduate.admissions.GW.edu/gw- your-area • Online Event Registration Site: http://gwpublichealth.eventbrite.com/ • Web advertising: see ERF 4.3.c.: Advertising Examples

4.3.d. Quantitative information on the number of applicants, acceptances and enrollment, by concentration, for each degree, for each of the last three years. Data must be presented in table format. See CEPH Data Template 4.3.1.

CEPH Data Template 4.3.1 below presents admission data for the past three academic years. The PhD and MS in Epidemiology were transferred to the School from the Columbian College of Arts and Science in 2013. We admit new students to the DrPH program every other year (even numbered years). The MPH@GW was launched in June 2013 and the MHA@GW launched in April 2014.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 257 CEPH Data Template 4.3.1.: Admissions Data

2013 2014 2015 Template 4.3.1.: Admissions Data- Bachelor of Science Degrees Applied 780 627 549 Exercise Science Accepted 75 45 60 Enrolled 28 25 30 Applied 49 49 39 Public Health1 Accepted 32 36 37 Enrolled2 32 33 35 Applied 829 676 588 BS Total Accepted 107 81 97 Enrolled 60 58 65 Enrollment based on calendar year enrollment: e.g. Spring 2013, Summer 2013, Fall 2013 1Public Health program data obtained through Admissions database, since students apply directly to the School and do not go through SOPHAS. 2In 2013, two of the enrolled students were accepted into the five-year BS/MPH program; in 2014 it was four students; and in 2015, three students.

2013 2014 2015 Template 4.3.1.: Admissions Data- MPH Programs Applied N/A 46 59 Biostatistics1 Accepted N/A 29 40 Enrolled N/A 0 5 Applied 73 71 81 Community-Oriented Primary Care Accepted 57 66 74 Enrolled 17 13 14 Applied 60 31 38 Environmental Health Science & Policy Accepted 38 24 22 Enrolled 9 10 5 Applied N/A 315 343 Epidemiology1 Accepted N/A 197 201 Enrolled N/A 30 32 Applied 449 361 N/A Epidemiology - Biostatistics1 Accepted 262 226 N/A Enrolled 32 30 N/A Applied 55 45 50 Global Environmental Health Accepted 38 30 36 Enrolled 9 7 6

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 258 Template 4.3.1.: Admissions Data- MPH Programs, (continued) 2013 2014 2015

Applied 353 297 N/A Global Health2 Accepted 210 179 N/A Enrolled 51 32 N/A Applied N/A N/A 87 Global Health Communication2 Accepted N/A N/A 51 Enrolled N/A N/A 11 Applied N/A N/A 91 Global Health Policy2 Accepted N/A N/A 55 Enrolled N/A N/A 7 Applied NA NA 164 Global Health Program Design, Monitoring & Evaluation2 Accepted N/A N/A 119 Enrolled N/A N/A 25 Applied 228 200 211 Health Policy Accepted 172 158 153 Enrolled 58 32 35 Applied 214 149 148 Health Promotion Accepted 144 117 109 Enrolled 24 10 21 Applied 154 119 124 Maternal & Child Health Accepted 98 87 83 Enrolled 20 16 21 Applied 182 848 1209 Public Health (MPH@GW)3 Accepted 142 497 763 Enrolled 108 214 492 Applied 41 23 25 Physical Activity in Public Health Accepted 24 17 19 Enrolled 15 6 10 Applied 56 37 46 Public Health Communications & Marketing Accepted 39 34 33 Enrolled 13 12 20 Applied 46 39 N/A Public Health Management4 Accepted 10 11 N/A Enrolled 1 0 N/A Applied N/A 45 62 Public Health Nutrition5 Accepted N/A 29 31 Enrolled N/A 11 10 Applied 1911 2626 2738 MPH Total Accepted 1234 1701 1789 Enrolled 357 423 714

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 259 Enrollment based on calendar year enrollment: e.g. Spring 2013, Summer 2013, Fall 2013. 1Coding for the MPH, Epi and MPH, Biostat programs was corrected to track separately as of mid-2014. Therefore no data available in 2013 for these separate tracks; 2014 shows data for combined and separate tracks, representing the coding change mid-year. 2MPH, Global Health was one track with a variety of concentration options prior to Fall 2014. Three distinct GH majors were defined as of mid-2014. Admissions coding/tracking changed mid-year, therefore data is distributed among all four majors for 2014. 2015 represents admissions in three distinct tracks. 3 MPH@GW enrolls in January, March, June and September 4MPH, Public Health Management did not admit in 2015. Track deactivated. 5MPH, PH Nutrition is a new program that began in Fall 2014.

2013 2014 2015 Template 4.3.1.: Admissions Data- MHA Programs Applied 163 148 155 MHA Accepted 96 97 91 Enrolled 35 28 29 Applied N/A 116 270 Executive MHA (MHA@GW)1 Accepted N/A 47 159 Enrolled N/A 25 113 Applied 163 264 425 MHA Total Accepted 96 144 250 Enrolled 35 53 142 Enrollment based on calendar year enrollment: e.g. Spring 2013, Summer 2013, Fall 2013. 1 Program did not exist prior to 2014, Executive MHA enrolls in January, April, July, & Oct.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 260

2013 2014 2015 Template 4.3.1.: Admissions Data- MS Degrees Applied N/A 19 20 Epidemiology1 Accepted N/A 6 9 Enrolled N/A 1 2 Applied 39 44 36 Exercise Science Accepted 28 31 27 Enrolled 19 13 8 Applied 17 11 12 Health Policy Accepted 12 6 7 Enrolled 3 2 2 Applied 80 66 70 Public Health Microbiology & Emerging Accepted 63 55 42 Infectious Diseases Enrolled 20 10 9 Applied 136 140 138 MS Total Accepted 103 98 85 Enrolled 42 26 21 Enrollment based on calendar year enrollment: e.g. Spring 2013, Summer 2013, Fall 2013. 1 MS, Epidemiology was offered through CCAS prior to 2014.

2013 2014 2015 Template 4.3.1.: Admissions Data- Doctoral Degrees Applied N/A 20 N/A DrPH - Environmental & Occupational Accepted N/A 8 N/A Health1 Enrolled N/A 5 N/A Applied N/A 80 N/A DrPH - Global Health1 Accepted N/A 6 N/A Enrolled N/A 3 N/A Applied N/A 68 N/A DrPH - Health Behavior1 Accepted N/A 9 N/A Enrolled N/A 7 N/A Applied N/A 34 N/A DrPH - Health Policy1 Accepted N/A 8 N/A Enrolled N/A 6 N/A Applied N/A* 74 86 PhD - Epidemiology2 Accepted N/A* 15 13 Enrolled N/A* 5 7 Applied N/A 276 86 Doctoral Total Accepted N/A 46 13 Enrolled N/A 26 7

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 261 Enrollment based on calendar year enrollment: e.g. Spring 2013, Summer 2013, Fall 2013. 1 DrPH Programs only admit in even years. 2 PhD, Epidemiology was offered through CCAS prior to 2014.

Undergraduate admissions support for the BS, Exercise Science program is conducted centrally through the university. Once students are accepted, the SPH Exercise and Nutrition Sciences (EXNS) faculty and the Admissions departments work together to yield a strong class. Undergraduates wishing to complete a BS degree in public health apply directly to the SPH Admissions Department in the fall or spring of their sophomore year. This program is very competitive and yield is always close to 100%.

The yield rate for the MPH@GW program is significantly higher than the residential program. For the online students, our vendor (2U, Inc.) is responsible for recruitment and coaching applicants through the process.

Table 4.3.c.: Summary Statistics for Admissions

Degree 2013 2014 2015 UG- Exercise Science Accept Rate 9.6% 7.2% 10.9% Yield* 37.3% 55.6% 50.0% UG- Public Health Accept Rate 65.3% 73.5% 92.3% Yield 100% 91.7% 94.6% MPH-OVERALL Accept Rate 64.6% 64.8% 65.3% Yield 28.9% 24.9% 39.9% MPH Residential Accept Rate 63.2% 69.0% 67.1% Yield 22.8% 18.3% 21.6% MPH-Online Accept Rate 78.0% 58.6% 63.1% Yield 76.1% 43.1% 64.5% MHA-OVERALL Accept Rate 58.9% 54.5% 58.8% Yield 36.5% 36.8% 56.8% MHA- Residential Accept Rate 58.9% 65.5% 58.7% Yield 36.5% 28.9% 31.9% MHA- Online Accept Rate N/A 40.5% 58.9% Yield N/A 53.2% 71.1% MS Accept Rate 75.7% 70.0% 61.6% Yield 40.8% 26.5% 24.7% Doctoral Accept Rate N/A 16.7% 15.1% Yield N/A 56.5% 53.8% * Yield = the percent of students who choose to enroll after being offered admission.

4.3.e. Quantitative information on the number of students enrolled in each specialty area identified in the instructional matrix, including headcounts of full-and part-time students and a full-time- equivalent conversion, by concentration, for each degree, for each of the last three years. Non-degree students, such as those enrolled in continuing education or certificate programs, should not be

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 262 included. Explain any important trends or patterns, including a persistent absence of students in any degree or specialization. Data must be presented in table format. See CEPH Data Template 4.3.2.

Student enrollment data by program can be found below in CEPH Data Template 4.3.2 below. In ERF 4.3.e.: CEPH Data Template 4.3.2 Enrollment Report and Supporting Documentation, enrollment data for all certificates and deactivated programs are outlined as shown in the category “Other”.

Most of our program enrollments have remained steady over the reporting period. For some, such as the undergraduate BS in public health and the DrPH, we have intentionally held enrollment at a given level. The enrollment for the PhD in Epidemiology and both of our online programs has increased. Two areas where we have experienced declining enrollments are the MS in Public Health Microbiology and Emerging Infectious Diseases and in the on campus MPH numbers. The MS enrollment dropped concurrent with our separation from the School of Medicine and the on campus MPH enrollment decreased when we opened the MPH@GW program, which was expected. Overall, our total enrollment has increased over the past three years, adding to our financial stability.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 263 CEPH Data Template 4.3.2.: Enrollment Data- Students Enrolled by Specialization AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 AY 2015-16 HC Students FTE Students HC Students FTE Students HC Students FTE Students EOH 61 41.55 61 46.12 59 41.33 MPH, EHSP 35 24.11 29 19.78 26 19.00 MPH, GEH1 17 13.67 19 17.78 23 16.11 DrPH, EOH2 8 3.44 13 8.56 10 6.22 Other5 1 0.33 0 0.00 0 0.00

Epi/Bio 180 137.79 179 135.88 166 140.66 MPH, Biost 12 9.89 9 8.44 9 7.44 MPH, Epi 98 75.22 98 80.89 92 72.67 MPH, GH Epi3 6 2.56 5 2.11 2 1.22 MS, Epi 5 4.11 4 3.22 4 3.00 MS, PH MEID 41 34.56 36 28.00 30 33.00 PhD, Epi 10 6.11 21 9.11 26 22.33 Other5 8 5.34 6 4.11 3 1.00

Ex & Nutr 175 166.61 181 169.71 182 171.26 BS, ExSc 55 54.33 48 46.83 82 78.91 BS, EXSC- Pre-Athl Trng 5 5.00 4 4.00 3 3.00 BS, EXSC- Pre-Medical 31 31.00 40 39.92 24 23.25 BS, EXSC- Phys Therapy 15 15.00 16 16.00 13 13.00 MPH, PH Nutrition N/A N/A 11 10.00 18 16.22 MPH, Phys Act 26 21.56 25 21.00 18 15.44 MS, EXSC- Clin Ex Phys 14 12.67 15 13.44 7 7.00 MS, EXSC-St & Cond 19 18.44 19 16.44 15 12.44 Other5 10 8.61 3 2.08 2 2.00

Global Health 150 107.43 117 83.11 113 70.34 MPH, GH Comm 20 14.44 20 13.22 23 12.78 MPH, GH DME 73 53.33 56 43.33 61 41.67 MPH, GH Pol 30 23.44 17 14.67 12 9.33 MPH, GH 15 10.55 9 5.55 4 1.67 DrPH, GH2 11 5.00 14 5.67 12 4.22 Other5 1 0.67 1 0.67 1 0.67

H Policy & Mgt4 230 173.55 258 196.65 331 237.50 Health Policy 145 106.11 138 102.10 117 82.56 MPH, Health Policy 122 94.22 112 90.44 93 70.67 MS, Health Policy 4 2.89 4 3.22 6 4.89 DrPH, Health Policy2 16 7.00 19 7.55 16 6.11 Other5 3 2.00 3 0.89 2 0.89

HSML 85 67.44 120 94.55 214 154.94 MHA/MHSA 79 63.11 87 73.39 87 68.11 EMHA (hybrid) N/A N/A 32 20.94 127 86.83 Specialist, H Svcs Adm 1 0.33 1 0.22 0 0.00 Other5 5 4.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 264 CEPH Data Template 4.3.2.: Enrollment Data- Students Enrolled by Specialization, (continued) AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 AY 2015-16 HC Students FTE Students HC Students FTE Students HC Students FTE Students PCH 193 157.78 165 130.89 169 135.33 MPH, COPC 32 28.89 33 30.11 33 28.00 MPH, Comm&Mktg 32 23.89 31 24.22 43 33.33 MPH, H Promo 51 43.89 37 30.11 35 29.67 MPH, MCH 56 48.89 40 33.67 43 36.44 DrPH, HB2 16 9.00 19 10.00 14 7.56 Other5 6 3.22 5 2.78 1 0.33

MPH@GW 107 67.44 399 240.89 702 421.89 BS, PH 60 60.00 68 67.42 61 61.00 OTHER5 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.33 SPH TOTALS 1156 912.15 1428 1070.67 1784 1279.64 Note: Used final Fall semester census data provided by the Office of Institutional Research. 2015-16 data collected as of September 24, 2015. LEGEND: HC = Headcount; FTE = Full time equivalent

1 MPH, GEH- joint program between EOH and GH 2 DrPH headcount does not equate to all students still in program because students who have completed all required dissertation credits and continue to be registerd for Continuous Enrollment do not appear on HC or FTE reports. 3 MPH, GH Epi- joint program between Epi/Bio and GH. Currently not admitting new students as program is being reconfigured. 4 2014-15: Departments of Health Policy and Health Services Management & Leadership have merged to Health Policy & Management 5 The OTHER category includes students enrolled in certificate programs as well as a few masters students who are completing their degrees in programs that we have inactivated. See Separate sheet in ERF 4.3.e for details.

4.3.f. Identification of measurable objectives by which the school may evaluate its success in enrolling a qualified student body, along with data regarding the performance of the school against those measures for each of the last three years.

Table 4.3.f.1.: Assessment of Success Enrolling a Qualified Student Body Outcome Measure Target 2013 2014 2015 Average GPA of enrolled UG PH 3.2 GPA 3.63 3.64 3.45 students Verbal 60% Residential: Residential: Residential: 65% 66% 65% Online: Online: Online: Average GRE percentile for 63% 67% 63% enrolled master students1 Quantitative 60% Residential: Residential: Residential: 54% 54% 52% Online: Online: Online: 45% 40% 37% Percent of enrolled MPH 50% Residential: Residential: Residential: students with at least one year 63% 62% 61% of work experience2 Online: Online: Online: 82% 87% 82% Percent of MPH students who 80% 82.0% 90.4% 80.2 graduate within 4 years (matriculated (matriculated (matriculated 2009-10) 2010-11) 2011-12)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 265 Table 4.3.f.1.: Assessment of Success Enrolling a Qualified Student Body, (continued) Outcome Measure Target 2013 2014 2015 Percent of DrPH enrolled 80% N/A 86% N/A students with > 3 years relevant work experience

Average GRE percentile for Verbal 70% N/A 76% N/A matriculated DrPH students Quantitative 60% 60% Average graduate school GPA > 3.5 N/A 3.77 N/A for enrolled DrPH students Data for GPA’s, GRE’s, and work experience above are based on calendar year enrollment; e.g. Spring 2013, Summer 2013, Fall 2013. 1Online includes MPH@GW only. Roughly half of the MPH@GW students have an advanced degree and are not required to take the GRE’s. MHA@GW program does not require GRE for admission. 2MHA@GW is not included because three years of work experience is required for admission.

4.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: • SPH has many modalities for communication with potential applicants. • Inclusion of the online programs has helped us to attract more students with greater work experience. • Quality indicators of enrolled students is improving and/or remaining constant. • We now have the authority to confer a PhD.

Challenges: • The high cost of tuition may deter qualified applicants. • Low yield rates for many of our residential programs.

Future Plans: • Establish a digital marketing strategy to continue to attract highly qualified students. • Work with external consultant to determine most effective way to distribute scholarship money to increase yield.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 266 4.4 ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING. THERE SHALL BE AVAILABLE A CLEARLY EXPLAINED AND ACCESSIBLE ACADEMIC ADVISING SYSTEM FOR STUDENTS, AS WELL AS READILY AVAILABLE CAREER AND PLACEMENT ADVICE.

4.4.a. Description of the school’s advising services for students in all degree programs, including sample materials such as student handbooks. Include an explanation of how faculty are selected for and oriented to their advising responsibilities.

Undergraduate programs: GW uses DegreeMap, an online advising and degree auditing system, to help advise students. DegreeMap is available to both students and faculty. Students in the EXNS BS programs are assigned a faculty advisor based on their track. The Office of Student Affairs provides professional and academic advice to students in the BS Public Health program. Also, the program director for the Bachelor of Science in Public Health provides professional advisement for those students.

Masters programs: Departmental faculty program directors, along with other faculty affiliated with each track, provide academic advisement in selecting appropriate elective courses and identifying a practicum experience relevant to career goals. Students also are assigned a Culminating Experience Advisor. Department chairs select program directors and practicum directors. The majority of faculty will serve as advisors for the culminating experience. Student advisement is generally limited to a small subset of faculty who provide consistency via advising many students.

Doctoral programs: The doctoral students receive advisement from the program director and/or a faculty member designated by the program director, in addition to their thesis supervisor and thesis committee. Selection and orientation of advisors is the responsibility of doctoral program directors.

Handbooks/website links relevant to faculty advising: http://publichealth.GW.edu/pdf/Handbook.pdf and http://publichealth.GW.edu/academics/advising

For DrPH:

http://publichealth.gwu.edu/pdf/DrPH_Handbook_2014.pdf , http://publichealth.gwu.edu/pdf/drph_faq.pdf

4.4.b. Description of the school’s career counseling services for students in all degree programs. Include an explanation of efforts to tailor services to specific needs in the school’s student population.

The SPH offers a wide variety of Career Services to undergraduate and graduate students, as well as alumni. Extended services include hosting events, coordinating applicable programming, and providing one-on-one counseling for students and graduates. We also partner with hiring organizations to facilitate opportunities for students to interact with employers and industry leaders through both the SPH and the broader GW community, in order to ensure that the information received is relevant and timely.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 267 Public Health and Health Services Career Fair SPH hosts an annual Public Health and Health Services Career Fair every spring. This fair is open to all GW students and alumni. Representatives from government, non-profit and private sectors attend and meet with students to discuss their organizational needs and accept resumes. We promote the annual career fair in both the student and the alumni newsletters, as well as through the SPH website and social media including LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. The event is also highlighted on the GW Calendar of Events. On average, more than 40 employers register for the Career Fair, and over 200 students attend each year.

Career Panels The SPH hosts GW alumni from diverse professional backgrounds on panels addressing a variety of topics to provide opportunities for alumni to share their experiences around transitioning from an academic life to a professional career. We include diverse alumni in the fields of consulting, government and non-profit agencies, pharmaceuticals, and others. These panels are hosted twice annually (In fall and spring), and are coordinated by both faculty/departments and/or student associations in addition to SPH Career Services. GW Career Services also hosts broader career panels for all students/alumni across the University and the SPH Career Services office advertises these to the SPH community.

Career Counseling SPH Career Services and the GW Center for Career Services (http://careerservices.GW.edu/) have dedicated staff available to undergraduate and graduate students for one-on-one career counseling. Undergraduates utilize the services of the GW Career Center for career coaching, assessments, and employment support. The GW Center for Career Services offers career fairs and other events for all students. Graduate students meet directly with the SPH Career Services Counselor. Both residential and online students have access for individual coaching; they may visit in person, via email, phone, or Adobe Connect (http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/career-center/counseling). The SPH Career Services department maintains a jobs database, documents library, and hosts events for the graduate students.

Most commonly, services used by our students include:

Undergraduate Students Graduate Students • Career Discovery Assessment Tools • Resume/Cover Letter Revision • Resume/Cover Letter Critique • Job Description Analysis • Job Search Resources • Job Search Strategy Discussions • (http://careerservices.GW.edu/services) • Interview Preparation • Offer/Salary Negotiation (http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/career- center/counseling)

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 268

Online Resources The SPH provides a variety of resources to assist students and alumni in identifying and making use of career opportunities. These include: • Access to the GWork for Public Health database to search for open jobs, internships and fellowships (https://publichealth-gwu-csm.symplicity.com). • Weekly SPH Student Newsletter updates students via email of school wide activities, upcoming events and deadlines, and other notable information. Career Services has proven to be one of the most viewed sections of the newsletter and contains a Q&A section to allow students to ask questions anonymously. • The SPH Career Center Website features links to templates, resources, job banks, professional associations, Careers in Public Health overviews, and more. (http://publichealth.GW.edu/services/career-center). • LinkedIn- The broader GW Public Health Network is the umbrella group for our current students and alumni. Underneath this network are specialty subgroups including; BPHSN and MPH@GW, among others. Subgroups can be created for departments and student organizations based on their agreement to manage these networks and produce relevant public health discussion on a regular basis, to better effect impact of engagement.

Many alumni events are hosted by SPH and/or GW. Alumni events focused on career support and career networking are hosted often for our students and alumni. For examples of events, go to ERF 4.4.b: Alumni Events.

4.4.c. Information about student satisfaction with advising and career counseling services.

Student satisfaction is paramount to the SPH Student Services team. To date, the only quantifiable information available has been collected through graduation surveys administered university-wide. The table below is summary data from SPH students from the past three years on questions regarding career services from the Graduate Student Graduation Survey. The response rate varies between 70-80% of graduating students. The complete GW Graduate Survey results are available in ERF 2.7.b.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 269 Table 4.4.c.: GW Graduation Survey Response Summary Question 2012 2013 2014

Usage and evaluation of guidance re; career options and plans (1-51)

Other faculty or staff in department or program 3.3 3.4 3.3

Your advisor 3.1 3.3 3.2

Your school’s career center 2.8 3.0 2.7

GW alumni 3.3 3.2 3.2

GW’s career center 2.8 2.7 2.7

Have you received advice on how to search for a job? 44% no2 37% no 41% no

Have you received advice on how to prepare a resume/CV? 37% no 34% no 32% no

Have you received advice on how to prepare for an interview? 52% no 49% no 52% no

Level of satisfaction with advice about career options within academia 0% diss3 2% diss 0% diss

Level of satisfaction with advice about career options outside academia 0% diss 5% dis 4% diss

15 = excellent; 1 = poor 2no = did not receive advice 3diss = somewhat or very dissatisfied

The results from the graduation survey indicate a need for improvement. Possibly, our midcareer students have not sought advice on basic issues such as how to search for a job, prepare a resume, or prepare for an interview. However, we would like to see a higher average level of satisfaction, at least a 3.5 rating, with advisors’, faculty members’, and the SPHs’ provision of career guidance. Of note, the SPH does not have a career center, but rather a career consultant. Prior to March 2013, we had two staff members dedicated to career services: one for alumni and one for current students. Both employees left the University this past year, so that we were understaffed in this area for several months. In February 2015, the SPH hired the current Career Consultant.

We are currently engaged in various needs assessments to ascertain the most efficient and effective ways to serve our students and alumni. We are also working more collaboratively with the GW Center for Career Services and engaging faculty to provide more career advice. SPH hosts periodic roundtable sessions with the PHSA to learn more about student expectations and how we can meet them. The leadership of the Office of Student Affairs meets regularly with Faculty and Practicum Advisors to discuss best practices and to share information to gauge students’ satisfaction with career services. Student intake surveys, current student satisfaction surveys, and post-graduation surveys will be conducted

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 270 regularly to gather information. Events include participant evaluations to gather feedback for future events.

4.4.d. Description of the procedures by which students may communicate their concerns to school officials, including information about how these procedures are publicized and about the aggregate number of complaints and/or student grievances submitted for each of the last three years.

Informally, students are always invited to speak directly with program directors, chairs, or the academic dean about any relevant concerns.

Through the PHSA, students are represented on the SPH Executive Advisory Committee where they report concerns and activities every month. Students are also represented on most of SPH’s Standing Committees including; Curriculum Committee; Graduate Student Admissions Committee; and Research Committee as well as the Ad Hoc Committees such as Practice and the Student Affairs Advisory Board. The SPH Student Affairs Advisory Board includes representation from students, faculty, and staff and provides a forum for in depth discussion of any issue of concern to students.

If a student is concerned about a grade, the SPH Grade Appeal process is described in the Student Handbook: http://publichealth.GW.edu/pdf/Handbook.pdf. In brief, grade appeals are primarily resolved by course faculty. Students who are dissatisfied may take a grade appeal first to the relevant Department Chair and then, if unresolved, to a faculty review committee, who hears the case and makes a recommendation to the Dean, who has final authority.

If a student has a concern that has not been satisfactorily handled at the School level, he/she can elevate the complaint to the university level through a grievance process outlined in the Guide to Student Rights and Responsibilities (page 5); http://my.GW.edu/files/policies/Guide%20to%20Student%20Rights%202011-2012.pdf. This guide is available online to all students of GW. An Associate Dean of Students for Student Administrative Services oversees the grievance process for the university. We have not had any student grievances filed against the SPH in the past three years.

4.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met, with commentary.

Strengths: • The SPH provides a strong system of academic advisors to support students in degree programs at all levels via provision of consistent and timely advice throughout their programs. • The SPH provides an easily accessible platform for students and alumni for career support.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 271 • The SPH has provided strong partnerships with employers and faculty and the University to support our students. • SPH has provided a number of opportunities and channels for student participation and feedback and identification and resolution of problems that are experienced by students. • Hired an Assistant Dean for Student Services.

Weaknesses: • While there are areas of strength (BS and MHA programs), overall, the career advising is not highly rated by students. • Career advice has been overly dependent on the effort of limited staff. • Student career advising was disrupted by turnover among career counselors this past year.

Future Plans: • Transition career advising data to Symplicity so that we can maintain records of student meetings, track reasons for appointments, and collect offer/hire and compensation information. • Create student surveys to be administered at critical points in time to capture attitudes and service area strengths and weaknesses. The University surveys, while useful, are not timely and lack detail and specificity about individual efforts (e.g., we have not collected information about our Career Fair.) • Roundtable sessions with students are being conducted to brainstorm and provide a platform for them to present ideas to improve our efforts. • Solicit feedback from faculty regarding their greatest needs for advisement and career support as well as their capacity to help in specific areas. • Increase engagement of our alumni in career mentoring. • Partnerships will continue to expand to include other units within the University.

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 272 ELECTRONIC RESOURCE FILE OUTLINE

1.0 MILKEN INSTITUTE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH

1.1 Mission 1.1.d. Events Manual 1.1.e. Strategic Planning Steering Committee Strategic Planning Meeting April 2012 Strategic Plan Draft 2013 1.1.f. Annual Reports SPH Website link: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/

1.2 Evaluation 1.2.d. Third Party Comment

1.3 Institutional Environment 1.3.c. Overview of Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Process for Faculty & Librarians Faculty Diversity Advocate Degree Verification Policy

1.5 Governance 1.5.a. Committee Meeting Notes • Standing Committee Meetings o Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committee o Curriculum Committee o Graduate Student Admissions Committee o Executive Advisory Committee o Research Committee o Student Academic Appeals Committee • Ad Hoc Committee Reports o Practice Committee o Student Affairs Advisory Board • Other o PHSA – Student Association

1.6 Fiscal Resources 1.6.b. CEPH Data Template 1.6.1- Sources of Funds and Expenditures

1.7 Faculty and Other Resources 1.7.d. Additional Facilities Information 1.7.e. Science and Engineering Hall Plans Laboratory Space

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 273 1.7.g. Library Resources 1.7.h. GW Human Resources link: http://hr.gwu.edu/

1.8 Diversity 1.8.a.vi. Faculty Diversity Advocate

2.0 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS

2.1 Degree Offerings 2.1.b. Programs-At-A-Glance School Bulletin link: http://www.bulletin.gwu.edu/ SPH Website-Academic Programs link: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/academics

2.4 Practical Skills 2.4.a. Department Practica Directors Student Practicum Final Evaluation-Practicum Report Form Student Practicum Final Evaluation/Practicum Report Samples Preceptor Evaluation Form Preceptor Evaluation Samples 2.4.b. Practica Agencies

2.5 Culminating Experience 2.5.a. MPH Culminating Experience Syllabi & Materials MHA & MHA@GW Culminating Experience Syllabi & Materials DrPH Culminating Experience Syllabi & Materials

2.6 Required Competencies 2.6.b. CEPH Data Template 2.6.1- Curricular Maps: Program-Specific 2.6.c. Course Number Sequence Directory Syllabi: Required Courses Schedule of Classes and Instructors Syllabi: Elective Courses- Spring 2015

2.7 Assessment Procedures 2.7.b. CEPH Data Template 2.7.1. Graduation Rates GW Graduate Student Graduation Surveys GW Undergraduate Senior Surveys

2.9 Bachelor’s Degrees in Public Health 2.9.d. Culminating Experience Materials

2.11 Academic Degrees 2.11.c. Academic Programs- Student Work Samples and Materials by Program

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 274

3.0 CREATION, APPLICATION AND ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE

3.1 Research 3.1.a. SPH Grants Management Positions 3.1.c. CEPH Data Template 3.1.1-Research Activity 3.1.d. Research Blueprint

3.2 Service 3.2.c. CEPH Data Templates 3.2.1-Faculty Service

3.3 Workforce Development 3.3.b. Workforce Development Report

4.0 FACULTY, STAFF, AND STUDENTS

4.1 Faculty Qualifications 4.1.a. CEPH Data Template 4.1.1- Primary Faculty- Fall 2015 Primary Faculty Curriculum Vitae 4.1.b. CEPH Data Template 4.1.2- Other Faculty- Fall 2015 Other Faculty Curriculum Vitae 4.1.d. Departmental APT Criteria

4.2 Course Evaluations 4.2.d. Course Evaluation Samples- Spring 2015

4.3 Student Recruitment and Admissions 4.3.a. Admissions Travel Recruitment Schedule Recruitment Events School Academic Prospectus 4.3.b. Graduate Student Handbook link: http://publichealth.gwu.edu/sites/default/files/downloads/admissions/Milken%20Hand book%202015-2016.pdf Graduate Admissions Requirements & Minimum Admissions Standards 4.3.c. Recruitment Marketing Examples 4.3.e. CEPH Data Template 4.3.2-Enrollment Report

4.4 Advising and Career Counseling 4.4.b. Alumni Events Summary

Milken Institute SPH, Self-Study, 2015 275